I

Applied Research Laboratory 0

a)
oco lTICg F1LE COp)'
Technical Report

INFLUENCE OF PROCESS PARAMETERS

0ON LASER WELD CHARACTERISTICS
IN ALUMINUM ALLOYS

by

Nagesh Sonti

DjTIC
r' 7 E
AUG 1 9 1988
SH

Approed !or pubLic roe=*o;

PENN STATE
 The Pennsylvania State University
APPLIED RESEARCH LABORATORY
P. 0. Box 30
State College, PA 16804

INFLUENCE OF PROCESS PARAMETERS

ON LASER WELD CHARACTERISTICS
IN ALUMINUM ALLOYS

by

Nagesh Sonti DTIC

AUG 1 9 1988

Technical Report No. TR 88-011

August 1988

Supported by: L. R. Hettche, Director

Naval Sea Systems Command Applied Research Laboratory

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited

tp
. %X
 i

Unclassified I 2
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE /
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE
la. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION lb. RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS
Unclassified
2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 3. DISTRIBUTION /AVAILABILITY OF REPORT

2b. DECLASSIFICATION /DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE Unlimited

4 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) S. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

6& NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 6b OFFICE SYMBOL 7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION
Applied Research Laboratory (If applicable) Naval Sea Systems Command
The Pennsylvania State Univers ty ARL Department of the Navy
6C ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIPCode) 7b. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code)
P. 0. Box 30
State College, PA 16804 Washington, DC 20362

E UNiGabONSRIN
ORGANIZATIONN if
1Bb. OFFICE
8. NAME OF FUNDING /SPONSORING
( EA
SYMBOL 9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
Naval Sea Systems Command

Sc. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS
Department of the Navy PROGRAM PROJECT TASK WORK UNIT
20362 ELEMENT NO. NO. NO. ACCESSION NO.
Washington, DC

1 TITLE (Include Security Classification)

Influence of Process Parameters on Laser Weld
Characteristics in Aluminum Alloys
12 PERSONAL AUTHOR(S) "
Nagesh Sonti
13a TYPE OF REPORT 13b TIME COVERED " 14. DATE OF REPORT (Year, Month, Day) 1S. PAGE COUNT
Ph.D. Thesis FROM TO0 August 1988 177
16 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION 7 ,f
.

17 COSATI CODES I18. SUBJ TERMS (Continue . reverse fc y and identify by block number)
FIELD GROUP SUB-GROUP aluminum alloy welding, C0 laser welding, numerical

modeling, weld defects * , - ,, ..

19 ABSTRACT (C,, ue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)

Multi-kilowatt CO 2 lasers are increasingly being used for welding applications

due to their capability of producing deep penetration welds at high welding speeds.
Although most metals are being successfully welded, laser welding of aluminum
alloys is proving to be very difficult. Combination of high thermal diffusivity w

and optical reflectivity to CO 2 laser radiation causes difficulty in coupling the

laser energy to the material. Much higher laser intensities are required to ensure -

20 DISTRIBUTION/ AVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT 21. ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

CgUNCLASSIFIED/JNLIMITED 0 SAME AS RPT. [3 OTIC USERS Unclassified
22a NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 22b. TELEPHONE (Include Area Code) 22c. OFFICE SYMBOL

DO FORM 1473. 84 MAR 83 APR edition may be used until exhausted. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE
All other editions are obsolete. Uclassified
 Unclassified 0
SECURITY CLASIIFICATION OP THIS PAE

coupling and to form the keyhole, than to maintain the keyhole and obtain
smooth fusion, as absorption of laser energy improves dramatically with the
keyhole formation. Laser welds in aluminum alloys contain extensive porosity,
and excessive vaporization of alloying elements occurs from the fusion zone. The
welds have severe undercuts and large discontinuous cavities on the bead surface.

A more precise control of the weld heat input and a better understanding of the
influence of process parameters and the alloying content on the weld characteristics
is required to improve the laser weldability of aluminum alloys. ,- -

- High power laser welds in aluminum alloys were characterized in terms of

the weld shape and dimensions, the nature and amount of porosity, loss of
elements from the fusion zone, and the microstructures in and around the 0
welds. A two-dimensional finite element heat conduction model was developed
to numerically simulate the melting and solidification phenomena in keyhole laser
welds. Significant variations in weld dimensions were observed among the different

aluminum alloys with marked difference in the welding process efficiencies. The
magnesium containing 5xxx series alloys showed the highest weld penetrations, as
well as periodic variation in the penetration along the weld length, evidently caused
by an unstable and oscillating keyhole. Alloy 2219 contained large shrinkage

cavities in the welds, but showed the minimum amount of voids among the
alloys investigated. Laser welds in the 5xxx series alloys had excessive amount
of spherical porosity and large irregular shaped cavities. Significant vaporization
of magnesium and aluminum from the weld, and the entrapment of parts of the
unstable cavity in the solidifying metal, are believed to cause the excessive amount
of voids observed in the 5xxx series alloys.

Unclassifipdi
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PA',
 ABSTRACT

Multi-kilowatt C0 2 lasers are increasingly being used for welding applications

due to their capability of producing deep penetration welds at high welding speeds.

Although most metals are being successfully welded, laser welding of aluminum

alloys is proving to be very difficult. Combination of high thermal diffusivity

and optical reflectivity to C0 2 laser radiation causes difficulty in coupling the

laser energy to the material. Much higher laser intensities are required to ensure

coupling and to form the keyhole, than to maintain the keyhole and obtain

smooth fusion, as absorption of laser energy improves dramatically with the

keyhole formation. Laser welds in aluminum alloys contain extensive porosity,

and excessive vaporization of alloying elements occurs from the fusion zone. The

welds have severe undercuts and large discontinuous cavities on the bead surface.

A more precise control of the weld heat input and a better understanding of the

influence of process parameters and the alloying content on the weld characteristics

is required to improve the laser weldability of aluminum alloys.

High power laser welds in aluminum alloys were characterized in terms of

the weld shape and dimensions, the nature and amount of porosity, loss of

elements from the fusion zone, and the microstructures in and around the

welds. A two-dimensional finite element heat conduction model was developed 5

to numerically simulate the melting and solidification phenomena in keyhole laser

welds. Significant variations in weld dimensions were observed among the different

aluminum alloys with marked difference in the welding process efficiencies. The

magnesium containing 5xxx series alloys showed the highest weld penetrations, as
well az periodic variation in the penetration along the weld length, evidently caused

by an unstable and oscillating keyhole. Alloy 2219 contained large shrinkage

S'
' " " il
' b.' %'% '% % "" " " P'
. , , ... .
 iv

cavities in the welds, but showed the minimum amount of voids among the

alloys investigated. Laser welds in the 5xxx series alloys had excessive amount

of spherical porosity and large irregular shaped cavities. Significant vaporization

of magnesium and aluminum from the weld, and the entrapment of parts of the "

unstable cavity in the solidifying metal, are believed to cause the excessive amount

of voids observed in the 5xxx series alloys.

AceesoIn For

INTIS GFA&I
D2 TAV ~ [

A,;" 1.Itt Codes

'I
D, ,
 Pagew

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES .................................................... viii

LIST OF FIGURES.....o...................................... ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................ xiii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................... 1

1.1 Factors Affecting Aluminum Laser Weldability 1

1.2 O bjectives .................................... 7
1.3 Scope and Outline of Thesis .................. 8

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................ 10

2.1 Laser Welding of Aluminum Alloys ............ 10

2.1.1 Laser Material Interactions ............. 10
2.1.2 Porosity in Aluminum Welds ........... 13
2.2.2 Alloying Element Vaporization ......... 18
2.2 Modeling of Heat Flow in Welds .............. 19
2.2.1 Analytical Methods .................... 20
2.2.2 Numerical Methods .................... 22
2.2.2.1 Consistent vs. Lumped C ....... 24
2.2.2.2 Integration Schemes ............ 25
2.2.2.3 Weld Heat Source Distribution 28
2.3 Sum m ary ..................................... 30

CHAPTER 3 EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS ........................ 31

3.1 Surface Preparation ........................... 31

3.2 Welding Parameters .......................... 33
3.3 Testing ....................................... 35
3.4 Vaporization Studies .......................... 36

- - ~ ~e.'.r-vVN.W'
~ .~ .'.~ \d\ .'\ , ,'
 vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Page

CHAPTER 4 FINITE ELEMENT WELD HEAT CONDUCTION

M O D EL ............................................ 43

4.1 Problem Statement ........................... 43 1

4.2 Variational Formulation ....................... 46
4.3 Weld Heat Source Distribution ................ 52
4.4 Finite Element Program THERM ............. 53 0
4.5 Testing and Verification of the Model ......... 54
4.5.1 Integration Scheme ..................... 55
4.5.2 One Dimensional Solidification ......... 61
4.5.3 Two Dimensional Solidification ......... 63
4.5.4 Thermal Analysis of an Arc Weld ...... 68 9
4.5.5 Heat Transfer in a Submerged Arc Weld 73
4.5.6 Weld Profile in an Electron Beam Weld 75
4.5.7 Laser Weld in Stainless Steel ........... 80
4.6 Summ ary ..................................... 82

CHAPTER 5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...................... 83

5.1 Weld Bead Shape and Dimensions ............ 84

5.1.1 Weld Penetration ...................... 84
5.1.2 Weld Top Bead Width ................. 87
5.1.3 Aspect Ratio ........................... 90
5.1.4 Weld Cross-sectional Area .............. 92
5.1.5 Process Efficiency ...................... 92
5.1.6 Summary .............................. 98
5.2 Characterization of Surface Hydrogen ......... 100
5.3 Porosity in Aluminum Laser Welds ............ 101
5.3.1 Alloy 2219 ............................. 105
5.3.2 Alloy 5xxx ............................. 109
5.3.3 Alloy 6061 ............................. 109
5.3.4 Off-focus Welds ........................ 109
5.3.5 Summary .............................. 109
5.4 Vaporization of Alloying Elements ............ 111
5.4.1 Alloy 2219 ............................. 111
5.4.2 Alloys 5xxx ............................ 113
5.4.3 Summary .............................. 116
 vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Page

5.5 Microstructures in Aluminum Laser Welds .... 117

5.5.1 Alloy 2219 ............................. 118
5.5.2 Alloy 5xxx............................122
5.5.3 Alloy 6061 ............................. 125
5.6 Thermal Modeling of Aluminum Laser Welds ,. 130
5.6.1 Absorptivity ........................... 134
5.6.2 Prediction of Weld Geometry ........... 135
5.6.3 Prediction of Local Solidification Time . 147

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS .................................... 148

REFERENCES ...................................................... 152

APPENDIX INPUT AND OUTPUT DATA FILES ............... 158

.5

_e

S,.N

O..

LA

55]
 viii
LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

3.1 Nominal composition of aluminum alloys used ................. 32

3.2 Welding parameters used ...................................... 34

4.1 Interpolation functions used for up to 8 nodes quadrilateral

isoparam etric elements ........................................ 50

4.2 Expressions involved in equation 4.10 .......................... 51

4.3 Expressions involved in equation 4.13 .......................... 56

5.1 Weld metal composition in alloy 2219 .......................... 112 4,

5.2 Loss of aluminum related to porosity in alloy 2219 ............. 113

5.3 Weld metal composition in alloy 5083 ........................... 114

5.4 Weld metal composition in alloy 5456 .......................... 115

5.5 Loss of aluminum and magnesium related to porosity in

alloy 5083 ..................................................... 116

5.6 Loss of aluminum and magnesium related to porosity in

alloy 5456 ..................................................... 116

5.7 Temperature dependent thermal properties for aluminum alloys 76 132

5.8 Absorptivity values used in modeling aluminum laser welds .... 147

5.9 Solidification ti.-e in on-focus laser we.d in alloy 2219

(10 kw, 0.847 cm /sec) ......................................... 148

S
 ix
LIST OF FIGURES

S
Figure Page V

1.1 Keyhole mode of welding at high laser power intensity2 ........ 2

1.2 Reflectivity of metals as a function of wavelength 4. . ..... ... .... 4

1.3 Emissivity of metals as function of temperature 5 ... ..... ... .... . . . . 4

1.4 Increase in absorption of laser energy in the keyhole
mode due to multiple reflections8 ... ...... .... .... .... .... ..... 5 N

2.1 Hydrogen solubility in aluminum at atmospheric pressure 0

showing a sharp jump at meltng point 3 ...................... 14

2.2 Hydrogen solubility in liquid metals showing high ratio

of maximum solubility to melting point solubility for
alum inum 3 2 ........ ........ ....... ... ..... ..... ... .... .... .... 14

3.1 Vaporization plots for alloy 2219................................ 38

3.2 Vaporization plots for alloy 5083 ............................... 39

3.3 Vaporization plots for alloy 5456 ............................... 40

3.4 Vaporization plots for alloy 6061 ............................... 41

4.1 Two-dimensional weld geometry modeled ...................... 45

4.2 Temperature response in slab using consistent C (k=36) ....... 58

4.3 Temperature response in slab using consistent C (k=9) ......... 59

4.4 Temperature response in slab using lumped C (k=36) .......... 60

4.5 Mesh used for analyzing 1-dimensional solidification ............ 62

4.6 Location of solidus in 1-dimensional solidification .............. 64 ,

4.7 Temperature distribution in chill and melt ...................... 65

4.8 Location of solidus in 2-dimensional solidification .............. 67

4.9 Mesh used for thermal analysis of arc weld ..................... 69

4.10 Temperature response in arc weld ............................. 71 .z

4.11 Predicted bead shape in arc weld ............................. 72 -

4.12 Predicted cross-section of arc weld ............................. 74

 LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

Figure Page
4.13 Bead shape in submerged arc weld ............................. 76
4.14 Temperature distribution on top surface after 11.5 sec (SAW) . 77

4.15 Bead shape in electron beam weld...............................78

4.16 HAZ shape in electron beam weld ............................. 79

4.17 Cross-section of laser weld in 304 steel ......................... 81

5
5.1 Weld penetration in laser welds in aluminum alloys ............ 85
5.2 Weld top bead width in laser welds in aluminum alloys ..... 88

5.3 Aspect ratios in on-focus laser welds in aluminum alloys ........ 91

5.4 Weld area in laser welds in aluminum alloys ..................... 93

5.5 Process efficiency in laser welds in aluminum alloys ............ 96

5.6 Expected process efficiencies at varying power levels Pi ........ 99

5.7 Hydrogen intensity (+) on the surface of alloy 5083 from depth
profile using SIM S ............................................. 102 e

5.8 Relative intensity of H 2 /A1 on the surface of aluminum alloys .. 103

5.9 Transverse sections of on-focus laser welds showing porosity and
cavities ........................................................ 104

5.10 Longitudinal sections of on-focus laser welds showing cavities

and uneven penetration ........................................ 106

5.11 Volume of porosity in laser welds in aluminum alloys ............ 107

5.12 Base metal in alloy 2219 (x 100) ............................... 119

5.13 Fusion zone boundary with base metal on the right; cellular ..
structure changing to cellular dendritic in weld zone (x 200) ... 119

5.14 Weld metal near the fusion boundary; columnar dendritic

structure (x 200) .............................................. 120

5.15 Weld metal in the middle of the weld; equiaxed

dendrites (x 200) ............................................. 120

I
 xi

LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

'p

Figure Page
5.16 Fusion zone boundary showing epitaxial growth from parent
metal; liquation and agglomeration of e phase in HAZ
(x 500) ....................................................... 121
5.17 Base metal in alloy 5083 (x 200) .............................. 123
5.18 Fusion zone boundary with base metal on the right (x 200) .... 123
5.19 Weld metal in the middle of the weld (x 200) .................. 124
5.20 Base metal in alloy 6061-T6 (X 500) ........................... 126
5.21 HAZ showing overaged region (x 500) ......................... 126
5.22 Fusion zone showing liquation and agglomeration
of eutectic; weld is on the right (X 500) ........................ 127

5.23 Fusion zone showing columnar dendrites at the weld boundary; ..

epitaxial growth from the base metal on the right (x 250) ...... 127
5.24 Equiaxed dendritic structure in the middle of weld (x 250) ..... 128
5.25 Fusion zone boundary in 0.4 cm thick 6061-T6; large amount of .4.'.
liquation and agglomeration of eutectic in HAZ in lower half; :'.
columnar dendrites in weld in top half (x 200) ................. 129
5.26 Fusion zone at higher magnification (x 500) ................... 129
5.27 Large dendritic structure near weld boundary (x 500) ......... 131

5.28 Finer equiaxed structure in the middle of weld (x 500) ......... 131
5.29 Mesh used for analyzing aluminum laser welds ................. 133 S

5.30 Laser weld pool in alloy 2219 (10 kw, 1.27 cm/sec) ............. 136
5.31 Top view of laser weld pool in alloy 2219 (10 kw, 1.27 cm/sec) 137
5.32 Long section of laser weld pool in alloy 2219 (10 kw, 1.27 cm/sec) 138
5.33 Laser weld cross-section in alloy 2219 (5 kw, 0.635 cm/sec) ..... 139
5.34 Laser weld cross-section in alloy 2219 (10 kw, 1.27 cm/sec) ..... 140
oS
 xii

LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

i:
Figure Page

5.35 Laser weld cross-section in alloy 2219 (10 kw, off-focus) ........ 141
5.36 Laser weld cross-section in alloy 5xxx (5 kw, 0.635 cm/sec) ..... 142

5.37 Laser weld cross-section in alloy 5xxx (10 kw, 1.27 cm/sec) ..... 143

5.38 Laser weld cross-section in alloy 5xxx (5 kw, off-focus) 144

5.39 Laser weld cross-section in alloy 5xxx (10 kw, off-focus) ........ 145

5.40 Laser weld cross-section in alloy 6061 (10 kw, 1.27 cm/sec) ..... 146

9k
iv.
 xiii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS S

I wish to express my sincere gratitude to Professor Maurice F. Amateau for

giving me the opportunity to work on this project. His support, guidance and
advice during this research program have been invaluable.

I also wish to thank my doctoral committee members - Professors Richard

P. McNitt, Joseph C. Conway, Richard A. Queeney, and Tarasankar DebRoy -

for their advice and comments throughout the course of the investigation. My

thanks are also due to all the members of the Engineering Materials Department

at Applied Research Laboratory for their suggestions and help during the study.

Finally, I deeply appreciate the sacrifices that my family has so patiently endured

through these long years of my education.

I. % .i
 1IM

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION

Multi-kilowatt CO 2 lasers are increasingly being used for welding applications

because of their capability of producing deep penetration welds at high welding
speeds. The advantages of laser welding over the comparable electron beam
welding are that welding can be carried out without vacuum and without the
generation of x-rays, and that the raw laser beam can be optically transported
$
and shared by different work-stations. For power levels up to 5 kw, laser welding
is also more economical than electron beam welding.' However, weld penetrations
in laser welding have been significantly lower than in electron beam welding.

CO 2 lasers generate radiation at 10.6 micron wavelength in the infrared range.

Two techniques of laser welding are possible - conduction mode and keyhole mode
of welding. In the conduction mode, limited to thin-section welding, melting of
the metal occurs by the absorption of laser radiation on the plate surface and heat
conduction into the material. In the keyhole mode for deep penetration welding
at higher intensities, a vapor column or a keyhole is formed in the material as
shown in figure 1.1.2 The vapor column is in hydrodynamic equilibrium with the
surrounding molten metal, and as the material is traversed relative to the laser
beam, molten metal flows via the sides of the column to the rear of the weld pool
where solidification occurs.

1.1 Factors Affecting Aluminum Laser Weldability

Although most metals are being successfully welded using the laser beam, :e
aluminum alloys have proved to be very difficult to laser weld.' These alloys ,'
combine high thermal diffusivity with high optical reflectivity to CO 2 laser

11 1
 High intensity-.E
bpoeam 'Nkv Melted zone
(Pve) - -, ~ wi,: Wi

Molten pool

Death of weid
Pecnetatiorn (c!) I

Figure .1Keyhole mode of welding at high loser power

intensity.2
 3
radiation, causing difficulty in coupling the laser energy to the material. Re-
flectivity of aluminum at 10.6 micron wavelength is over 95% as seen in figure
1.2. 4 Although reflectivity decreases with increase in temperature, the change is

minimal for aluminum alloys as shown in figure 1.3.' To ensure coupling, much

higher intensities are required for aluminum alloys than for steels, and at such

intensities, welding occurs in the keyhole mode. However, absorption of laser

energy improves dramatically with the keyhole formation due to the black body

absorption characteristics of the cavity by way of multiple reflections (see figure

1.4).6 Thus, much higher laser intensities are required to ensure coupling and to

form the keyhole, than to maintain the keyhole and obtain smooth fusion.

Laser welds in aluminum alloys are prone to extensive porosity. Aluminum

welds in general are prone to porosity caused by the differential solubility of

hydrogen between the molten and the solidified metal. Porosity in arc welds
can be avoided with proper surface cleaning procedures to remove any sources of

hydrogen.8 However, such precautions have not reduced the excessive porosity

observed in aluminum laser welds. Further, laser welds in these alloys have
severe undercuts and, in some cases, large discontinuous cavities on the weld

bead surface., 10 In addition, significant amount of vaporization of elements occurs

from aluminum laser welds which in turn affects the weld microstructures and the

mechanical properties of the weldments.' 1 Presence of volatile alloying elements

like magnesium and zinc can further influence the weld metal characteristics in

the vaporization dominated keyhole mode.

Due to the poor laser weldability of aluminum alloys, not much information

is available on the influence of laser welding parameters on weld bead shape and

dimensions, nature, amount and distribution of porosity, loss of elements due to

vaporization, etc. A detailed parametric study is therefore necessary to gain a

Is
 4

'.0

O.Z \j0 - MICXcEL

Figure 1.2 Reflectivity of metals as a function of

wovelength.4

0.12 - 1. /,

0.04'

0.042

C0 /000 ,C

Figure 1.21 Eliszivity of metals c3 a function of

temoerature.
Cie o4.lo du er e e g

'Pi
re i n 1 the 0lc

.65
 6
better understanding of the problems involved in order to improve the quality of
aluminum laser welds with improved process controls.

Further, predictive models analyzing the thermal behavior of aluminum laser

welds can be very helpful in understanding the role of welding heat input

parameters on the final weld bead characteristics. In the thermal energy balance,

the convective terms can significantly influence the temperature profiles. However,

Oreper and Szekely1 2 have shown that for buoyancy dominated fluid flows at low

Reynold's number, the convective terms may be neglected without unduly affecting S

the weld thermal profiles. The laser welds in aluminum alloys were generally

found to satisfy such conditions, and heat conduction analysis is adequate to

reliably predict the weld profiles. In laser welding, there is also the phenomenon

of plasma generation at the plate surface.1 3 The plasma formation can result in

partial absorption of the laser energy. However, the influence of the plasma and

its interaction with the laser beam and the material is not yet well understood.

Its effect on the welding process is empirically incorporated in the form of overall

absorptivity of the material.

Surface heat sources have been effectively used for the numerical simulation of
arc welding processes. 1 4 However, these sources are not valid for deep penetration

electron beam and laser welding where the energy is deposited deep inside _0
the keyhole. In electron beam welding with high aspect ratios (ratio of weld

penetration to top bead width), cylindrical heat source models of constant

temperature boundariesI s ,"' have been used. Mazumder et al. 1 7 and Chande et

al.1 8 have attempted the simulation of the keyhole using the Beer-Lambert's law

using an absorptivity coefficient. Other researchers have used the weld profile to

adjust the welding heat source distribution for the modeling. For instance, Goldak

et al.1 9 ,2 0 used a model with up to eight parameters which were selected based on
 7
the experimental weld geometry. Further research is required both on the physical

phenomenon of energy transfer in laser welds as well as the numerical simulation

of keyhole laser welds.

1.2 Objectives

Aluminum alloys are very sensitive to high energy intensity, but require such

an intense laser beam to ensure coupling and form the keyhole. The energy input

at various stages of the laser weld cycle must be optimised to improve the quality 0

of laser welds in aluminum alloys. Present investigation was therefore conducted 1'

to study the influence of process parameters on the laser weld characteristics in

aluminum alloys. Following were the main objectives of the investigation:

i. To characterize the bead shape and dimensions of laser welds in aluminum

alloys in terms of the weld penetration, top bead width, aspect ratio,
weld cross-sectional area and the process efficiency for the different welding

conditions.

ii. To develop a two-dimensional non-linear transient finite element heat conduc- S

tion model for simulating the melting and solidification phenomena in keyhole

laser welds.

iii. Tu predict the laser weld pool dimensions in aluminum alloys using the finite

element heat conduction model developed.

iv. To characterize the natv-e, amount and distribution of porosity in laser welds "

in aluminum alloys in tt i of the input power, power intensity, welding speed

as well as the alloying content.

N
 8
v. To analyze the laser welds in aluminum alloys with regards to the vaporization

of alloying elements and the microstructures in and around the welds.

Aluminum alloys 2219, 5083, 5456 and 6061 were studied considering their

good weldability by conventional arc welding processes.

1.3 Scope and Outline of Thesis

Present investigation consisted of an experimental program to study the

influence of the process parameters on the weld metal characteristics in laser

welds in aluminum alloys. A two-dimensional finite element transient heat transfer

model was also developed to simulate the melting and solidification phenomena in

keyhole laser welds. Following is the layout of the thesis which describes both the

experimental and the modeling aspects of the investigation.

Chapter 2 describes the literature reviewed on specific problems associated

with the laser welding of aluminum alloys followed by the nature and causes of
porosity in aluminum welds. The significance of vaporization of alloying elements is

discussed with regards to the keyhole laser welding. Finally, the thermal modeling

of welds is explained with emphasis on the problems associated with the finite

element heat transfer models.

Chapter 3 describes the experimental details regarding the welding parameters

and the testing procedures used in laser welding of aluminum alloys. The analytical

procedures for the selective vaporization studies in aluminum laser welds are also

presented here.

In chapter 4, the finite element model is described in terms of the variational

formulation, the program THERM developed, and the testing and verification of S

0
the model for stability and accuracy.
S

In chapter 5, the results of the experimental program are presented and

discussed in terms of the weld bead dimensions, the nature and amount of porosity,

loss of elements due to vaporization from the weld pool, and the metallurgical

structures in and around the weld. Numerical predictions of laser weld pool
dimensions in aluminum alloys and local solidification times are also presented

here.

Finally, the important conclusions of the investigation are presented in chapter

6.

d.N
,.-'..
 -O

10

Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Laser welding has drawn considerable attention among the researchers with

regard to the mechanical properties of laser welds, interaction of laser beam with

the material, and the plasma plume generated at the surface of the material.
However, not much information exists regarding the laser welding of aluminum

alloys as these alloys have proved very difficult to laser weld. In this chapter,
a literature review of some aspects of laser welding of aluminum alloys and the

modeling of heat conduction in laser welding is presented.

2.1 Laser Welding of Aluminum Alloys

Factors affecting the laser weldability of aluminum alloys are discussed in the

following sections in terms of the high reflectivity to C02 laser radiation, high S

proneness to porosity, and the vaporization of volatile alloying elements. %

2.1.1 Laser Material Interactions

Laser irradiation of the material surface results in the heating of the substrate

surface due to the absorption of the quanta of light energy by the electrons. These

energised electrons rapidly release the energy by a process of collisions resulting "

in lattice vibrations and thereby heating. The absorption of the laser energy by
1
the surface of the material follows the relationship

a
E(x) = Eo(1 - R)e - --, (2.1)

where Eo and E(x) are the laser intensities at the surface and at depth x

respectively, R the optical reflectivity of the material to laser radiation and a 0

the absorption coefficient. For metallic surfaces, a is of the order of 10 - ' to 10- 5

%
 11 .

cm-1 , and therefore the energy absorption is limited to a very small depth of 10- 5 P

to 10 -4 cm at the surface. The absorbed energy is transferred into the material s

by heat conduction. The rate of absorption must be sufficient to initiate melting

and for the solid-liquid interface to move progressively to required depths.

Reflectivity R of the material depends on many factors. Figure 1.2 shows the
high optical reflectivity of many metallic substances to infra-red radiation. For

CO 2 laser radiation at 10.6 micron wavelength, the reflectivity for aluminum is

over 95%; less than 5% of the incident energy is therefore used for heating the

material surface. Reflectivity is also a function of the surface condition and the

chemical composition of the surface. Huntington and Eager 2 2 studied the effect

of the surface preparation on the absorptivity in aluminum alloy 5456. They

found anodized and sandblasted surfaces to have improved absorptivity and the

electropolished surface with decreased absorptivity as compared to the as-received

surface. They also found that for welding applications, the joint geometry had a
23
more pronounced effect on absorptivity than the surface preparation. Jergensen

observed an increase in weld penetration when a reactive mixture of argon and

oxygen was used as the shielding gas. He related the increased penetration to
24
a decrease in reflectivity of the oxide layer formed on the surface. McLachlan

applied a polymer coating on aluminum surfaces to improve the absorption of CO 2

laser radiation. S

Reflectivity also depends on temperature as seen in figure 1.3. As a surface is

irradiated, the absorptivity improves with interaction time due to the heating and

subsequent melting of the surface. By direct measurement of surface reflectivity,

Ready 1 found that the spectral reflectivity decrersed to about 80% of its initial

value for stainless steel.

'4
 12

At high laser intensities, other mechanisms begin to operate which dramat-

At intensities %
ically improve the energy absorption by the material surface.

sufficient to cause localized vaporization of the material, a vapor column or a

keyhole is formed as described in figure 1.1. Huntington and Eager 2 2 found

that the increase in absorptivity does not occur at melting, but is associated

with the keyhole formation. The marked increase in the absorptivity results

from the black body characteristics of the keyhole because of multiple reflections

with progressive amounts of energy absorbed at each interaction (see figure 1.4).
25
Effective absorption of up to 90% is possible in some cases.

Further, Marcus et al."3 have reported that at higher laser intensities sufficient

to cause the breakdown of the air at the material surface, the coupling efficiency is -

considerably improved. For an aluminum target surface, they observed a coupling

efficiency of over 30%, or an order of magnitude improvement from the initial

absorptivity level. Such enhancement is related to the formation of a plasma,

consisting of electrons, ions and neutral atoms, which can partially absorb the laser '

radiation. The high temperature plasma in turn can transfer the energy to the

material at a lower wavelength, thereby improving the effective absorptivity of the

material. However, the nature of interactions between the C02 laser radiation and

the plasma generated at the surface of aluminum alloys is not known. Therefore,

quantitative evaluation of the energy transfer from the plasma to the material 00

during keyhole laser welding is not feasible. The enhancement of absorption of

laser energy due to the plasma effects can only be incorporated empirically as

increased absorptivity coefficients.

Lewis and Dixon 26 , ' have shown that at sufficiently high intensities, the

plasma ignites and absorbs the incident laser energy. This ignition is associated

with the formation of a laser supported absorption wave. During laser radiation, a

._ __
 13
series of laser supported combustion waves are initiated, propagated and decayed.

As the laser supported absorption wave is opaque, it can prevent the laser energy

from reaching the plate surface. It can also result in enhanced coupling by way of

reradiation as mentioned earlier. However, the laser supported absorption waves

are generated at intensities greater than 107 w/cm 2 , higher than the intensities

involved in high power laser welding.

2.1.2 Porosity in Aluminum Welds

Aluminum alloys are generally weldable by most conventional welding pro-

cesses. Common defects that can manifest are porosity, crater and longitudinal

cracks, incomplete fusion, and undercuts. Most of these defects are avoided by

proper welding technique and/or by using compatible filler materials. Porosity,

however, has been a persistent problem." The main cause of porosity in aluminum

welds is hydrogen picked up from the absorbed and adsorbed moisture in the
surface oxides, oil and grease layers on the surface, moisture in the shielding

gases, and the dissolved hydrogen in the base metal as well as the filler wires,

the surface sources being the most significant. T, 2 , 29

Absorption of hydrogen in

aluminum welds follows Sievert's law. 30 As seen in figure 2.1 and 2.2, the solubility
of hydrogen in aluminum at the liquidus temperature is over 19 times that at the

solidus temperature, and the solubility in molten aluminum increases drastically S

with temperature.31 ' , 2 In particular, the ratio of maximum solubility to the

solubility at melting point for aluminum is over 70 as compared to about 1.4

for steels. S

The differential solubility of hydrogen in aluminum at the melting point has

been widely attributed to be the cause of pore formation, by a process of solute
,3 4
rejection and the resulting solute enrichment at the solid-liquid interface.3 0 , 3 3

~I~F%
 14

1110 1 1470

o%

O.S

0.1] - 0

A I- -

-= __I _"_ _ _

Figure 2.1 Hydrogen solubility in aluminum at

- 3-0I
atmospheric pressure showing a sharp jump
at melting point.3 1

.2
S7.0
Al
Hydrogen pressure 0.01 atm
_ _
I
( j* Ni
I
WA__

30

0 loco 7.0
15G0 zcO00 I-
750 0c0
Temoeroture (*C
Figure 2.2 Hydrogen solubility in licuid metals showing
high ratio of m ximum solubi iy to melting
point solubiity for luminum.
 15

However, Howden et al.3 5 have shown that in welds, the more important factor

is the much higher solubility of hydrogen at elevated temperatures. They found

that hydrogen is picked up over a small region of the weld pool where temperature

may be over 2000 'C. It is then distributed to the rest of the molten pool by

convection, thus causing the whole weld pool to attain a higher gas content

corresponding to a higher temperature. Thus, bubble nucleation occurs not only

at the preferred site of the solid-liquid interface, but also in the molten metal

due to its supersaturation. Although homogenous nucleation is not a feasible

mechanism for the initiation of pores, heterogeneous nucleation of bubbles in the

bulk liquid is possible at numerous inclusions sites available in the molten weld

metal. Uda et al. 3" also showed that the driving force for pore formation in

aluminum is the high solubility of hydrogen at elevated temperatures resulting in

bubble nucleation in the liquid. Nikiforov et al."7 calculated that in the diffusive

redistribution of hydrogen during solidification, hydrogen does not accumulate

substantially at the solid-liquid interface, and is not the main mechanism of pore

formation in aluminum welds.

Once nucleation has occurred, growth of the pores is a function of the

solidification rate, the diffusion rate of hydrogen, overall concentration of hydrogen

in the weld metal, and the concentration of the stable nuclei. 3 4 Porosity in welds

is therefore the result of two competing phenomena - nucleation and growth of

bubbles in the liquid metal and at the solid-liquid interface due to the rejection

of solute hydrogen, and the solidification of the liquid metal. The weld cooling

rate and hence the solidification rate and morphology significantly affect the 0

entrapment of bubbles in the solidifying metal.

Porosity can occur in many forms in aluminum fusion welds. The rejected

gas can be nucleated both in the liquid during solidification, and in the solid

,%b...
 16
immediately afterwards. 30 ,3" The former is called the primary porosity and the

latter the secondary porosity. Primary porosity in turn can manifest in two
ways. First type is the interdendritic porosity at low to intermediate levels of

supersaturation in the molten metal - it is growth substructure controdled and

occurs as small spherical pores or as long angular pores. The second type is

the large spherical pores which nucleate in highly supersaturated liquids and is

surface tension controlled. Secondary porosity usually consists of small spherical

pores distributed inside the grains.

Alloying elements like Mg, Zn, Cu and Si have significant effect on the
sensitivity to pore formation in aluminum alloys. Opie et al.3 9 showed that

additions of Cu and Si reduce the solubility of hydrogen, the former being more

effective. Woods 40 found that addition of 6% Mg nearly doubles the hydrogen

solubility in aluminum. Alloying elements not only affect the solid solubility, but

also the rate of absorption of hydrogen. In addition, alloying additions affect the
solidification range thereby affecting the bubble escape or entrapment.

Moreover, aluminum has a high volumetric expansion rate of about 6% on

melting as compared to iron which has only about 2.2% volume expansion. 4 1 This

manifests as shrinkage cavities or pores during solidification of castings depending

on the nature of heat extraction. Kubo et al.4 2 have shown that simultaneous S
occurrence of shrinkage and gas evolution is required for pore formation.

In spite of the high sensitivity, weld metal porosity in aluminum alloys can

be minimized by proper surface cleaning procedures. However, laser welds in

aluminum alloys are particularly prone to extensive porosity. Although electron

beam welding and laser welding are similar processes involving high intensity heat

sources and keyhole mode of welding, aluminum alloys are being electron beam S
 17
welded, but laser welding is proving so difficult.4 3 The electron beam couples easily

to aluminum alloys, thus requiring much lower intensities as compared to the laser

beam. The high vacuum required in electron beam welding ensures the removal
of absorbed moisture and gases from the surface, and also assists in the growth

and escape of the bubbles. In keyhole laser welding, the power intensity required

to initiate the keyhole in aluminum alloys is much higher than that required to
maintain the keyhole."' Overheating of molten metal caused by the higher intensity

can have deleterious effects like increased hydrogen content in molten aluminum

and excessive vaporization of the volatile alloying elements, thereby increasing the

probability of porosity formation during solidification.

Snow et al. 9 , 10 report some qualitative studies in aluminum, but were

unsuccessful in obtaining sound welds. They attempted controlled beam spot

rotation to disperse the intense input energy that is required for coupling. The
beam rotation improved the bead surface appearance and also reduced the violent

eruptions that take place on the weld surface in keyhole laser welds in aluminum
alloys. However, beam spot rotation requires extensive modification to the

laser optics. They also found excessive penetration an. drop through in deep

penetration laser butt welds in 5xxx series aluminum alloys due to the high fluidity

of molten metal. Other researchers also report some success in keyhole laser welds
1 1 22,4 4
in aluminum alloys, but porosity was not eliminated. '

2.1.2 Alloying Element Vaporization

Alloying elements added to aluminum for improving the mechanical properties

and corrosion resistance are Cu, Mn, Mg, Zn, Si, Fe, Ti, etc. Of these, Mg and

Zn are an order of magnitude more volatile than aluminum as indicated by the

vapor pressure data for these elements. During welding, selective vaporization of

ltV %
'. P ., '.& A''' % .. +
 18

the alloying elements in the aluminum alloys is expected, with significant effect on
1 investigated the
the mechanical properties of the welds. Moon and Metzbower

redistribution of the solutes and the precipitates in the fusion zone of high power

laser welds in aluminum alloy 5456. They found depletion of magnesium in the

weld, and vaporization of up to 90% of the precipitates. They also found increased

toughness in the weld resulting from the fusion zone purification, but the tensile

strength and ductility had decreased.

Block-Bolten and Eager 45 analyzed the selective vaporization of alloying

elements like Mn, Cr, Ni, and Al from stainless steel welds using the kinetic

theory of gases and the tabulated thermodynamic data for metallic elements and

binary alloys. They found Fe and Mn to be the dominant species which vaporized

during arc welding of these alloys. Further, using plots of evaporation power vs.

inverse temperature, they estimated the maximum weld pool surface temperature
46
to be approximately 2500 *C. Khan and Debroy used a similar analysis and

changes in the laser weld compositions in type 202 stainless steels to predict

weld pool surface temperatures. They demonstrated that the relative rates of

vaporization of any two elements from the molten pool can serve as an indicator

of weld pool temperature. Shaurer et al. used a similar approach to confirm the
47

peak temperature measurements they made in electron beam weld cavities using

an infrared radiation pyrometer. From the weld cross-sections, they measured the

cavity depth h and the base radius of the cavity r to calculate the vapor pressure

P, of the column using the relationship

P= p g h, (2.2)

where o is the surface tension of the material, p the density, and g the acceleration

due to gravity. Equation 2.2 represents the hydrodynamic equilibrium at the S

bottom of the vapor column. From the calculated vapor pressure, the associated
temperature was determined using the vapor pressure - temperature data for pure

metals. An analysis of the selective evaporation of alloying elements in laser welds 0

in aluminum alloys can provide an insight into the phenomena occurring and the
work carried out in this investigation is discussed in later chapters.

2.2 Modeling of Heat Flow in Laser Welds

To develop a predictive model for analyzing the thermal behavior of welds, the

heat conduction in the solid and the liquid metal, as well as the convective heat S
2
transfer in the molten pool must be considered. However, Oreper and Szekely'

have shown that the effect of convection in the molten pool on the temperature
profiles in the weld can be neglected if
Lz
Re- Pr k< 1. (2.3)
L

Here, Re is the Reynold's number, L. the characteristic depth of weld, L .

the plate thickness, Pr the Prandtl number, and k the characteristic thermal

conductivity. In the absence of electromagnetic forces in laser weld pools, the

fluid flow is dominated by the buoyancy forces due to the thermal gradients,

and to a lesser extent the surface tension driven flows on the liquid surface.
3
Under these conditions, the Reynold's number can be approximated as Gr A ,

where Gr is Grashof's number and A the aspect ratio of the weld. From the

experimental results, most of the laser welds in aluminum alloys were found

to satisfy the equation 2.3, and therefore the conduction dominated weld heat
flow models neglecting the convective heat transfer terms are adequate. The
convection in the molten metal also results in rapid dissipation of the superheat. In

numerical solutions, this is usually approximated as artificially enhanced thermal

conductivity in the molten pool. 4
 20

Welding heat transfer is a special class of heat conduction problems - called

the Stefen problem - which involve melting and/or solidification. The problem is s
non-linear due to the moving boundary of the solid-liquid interface whose location

is not known a priori, phase change and the corresponding absorption/evolution

of the latent heat of fusion, temperature dependent thermal properties, and the

convective and radiative boundary conditions. It is a transient three-dimensional

problem involving considerable mathematical complexity, and requires numerous

simplifying assumptions to obtain a reasonable analytical solution. In the following

sections, some of the analytical solutions and the numerical techniques applied to

solve these problems are discussed.

2.2.1 Analytical Methods

Rosenthal4 9 in his landmark paper "The Mathematical Theory of Heat Dis-

tribution during Welding and Cutting" presented a three-dimensional analytical

model for determining the temperature profiles surrounding a weld heat source in

a semi-infinite media. The main assumptions in his model were

i. A point heat source,

ii. Constant thermal properties,

S
iii. No latent heat of melting, .y.

iv. No surface heat losses,

v. Resistive heating of the material neglected.

He assumed a quasi-steady state condition in which the isotherms achieve a

steady state in a moving coordinate system attached to the heat source. Such

- '. ~% **~ ** *~ %
 21
an assumption is valid over the duration of the weld cycle away from the initial
transients and end effects. He also presented a two-dimensional line source model S

applicable for through thickness welding of thin plates. Myers et al. 5 0 presented

numerous solutions based on the above model for spot welding, filler wire additions,

thin plate welding, thick plate welding, plates with finite widths, etc. Although,

point/line source models give a reasonably good prediction far from the weld,

the results near the fusion zone are far from satisfactory. Christensen et al.5 1

measured the temperature distribution in steel and aluminum welds, and compared

the results with those predicted by the point source model. They observed a

systematic deviation from the predicted results both in the weld bead dimensions

and in the temperature distribution outside the weld pool. Predictions far from

the weld centerline were reasonably accurate.

Subsequent researchers have tried to improve the point/line source model by

removing some of the basic assumptions. Malmuth 5 2 took into account the phase

change involved in the melting and solidification of welds. He used the matched
asymptotic expansions to solve the problem, and found that the previous empirical

method of subtracting the latent heat from the input power overpredicted the effect 6

of phase change on weld penetration. Trivedi5 3 incorporated a moving circular

s used a similar
cylindrical heat source of finite height and radius. Tong and Geidt'
$
heat source to predict temperatures in deep penetration electron beam welds.

Although, the electron beam cavity depth oscillates at a frequency of about 10 - 100

cycles/second, they reasoned that the solid-liquid interface fluctuates only slightly,

and justified their assumption of a constant temperature cylindrical boundary

heat source. Their results agreed within 20% of the available experimental results.

Miyazaki and Geidt' 6 solved the heat conduction equation in elliptical coordinates

using an elliptically shaped heat source. Swift-Hook and Gick" used the line

ALA -1 ~n -I
 22
source theory for predicting penetration in EB and laser welding. Comparison with
electron beam welds was good; however, in laser welding an order of magnitude

improvement in weld penetration could be expected.

It is clear that for purely analytical solutions, many simplifying assumptions

are necessary. Even tackling one or two of the basic assumptions results in

enormous complexity. Such solutions, therefore can only have a qualitative appeal

closer to the heat source, although some useful information can be derived for

locations far from the weld. For instance, the prediction of martensitic formation

in the heat affected zone (HAZ) surrounding the fusion welds in high carbon steels
is usually done with reasonable accuracy using the analytical models. However,

improved models are required for better understanding of the heat flow near the
weld source.

2.2.2 Numerical Methods

Numerical techniques - both finite difference and finite element methods -

are proving to be more suitable for solving the heat transfer problems with phase

change. Time variant meshes which continuously trace the location of the solid-

liquid interface are limited to simpler geometries and one-dimensional problems.

For such an approach, two sets of partial differential equations with the associated .r.

boundary and initial conditions are used, one each for the solid and liquid region.
In addition, continuity of temperatures is enforced at the interface, along with a

relation for the temperature gradients representing the absorption or liberation of

latent heat 5
, a~T1 p
di(t) !%
kj-z - , = L d

Here, k i and k. are the thermal conductivity in the solid and liquid regions whose

interface is defined by x = a(t), t being the time parameter, T the temperature,

 23
p the density and L the latent heat of fusion. Generally, fixed mesh approaches
are used - ie., weak solutions are attempted where only one partial differential
equation with the associated boundary conditions is used for the whole region.

Finite difference methods have been widely used for modeling the solidification
of castings, and for welding problems. However, finite element methods are
increasingly being employed for welding applications as these techniques are
readily adapted to problems with non-linearities either due to geometric or
material effects. Both methods are equally effective for simpler geometries, but 0
for complex geometries, finite element method is clearly superior. It is also easily
coupled to thermal stress problems. Gray et al. 5 compared the two methods with
regards to accuracy and efficiency. They concluded that for certain formulations,
the finite element method takes less time and is more accurate than the finite
difference method. They also found that the finite element method showed a
maximum accuracy with increasing number of nodes after which the error and Nre
computation time increased due to the round-off error in the Gaussian elimination
scheme. The computer core storage required for the finite element method is
larger. S

The finite element formulation uses either the variational method or the

weighted residual methods like the Galerkin method, least square method, or . e
the collocation method. By the usual discretisation procedure, the governing
partial differential equation and the associated boundary and initial conditions
are transformed into a set of simultaneous differential equations of the form

%
C T + K T = R.(.)

Here, T is the nodal temperature vector and "ithe vector of 11. C describes "

the heat capacity terms and includes the density, specific heat and the volume of

p.. .
 24 W

the elements. K represents the conductivity matrix and includes heat conduction
between the various elements and also the convective and radiative boundary r
conditions if any. The load vector R represents the effects of the specified boundary
heat flux, specified temperature conditions, internal heat generation terms, etc.

2.2.2.1 Consistent vs. Lumped C

For linear heat conduction problems, the conductivity matrix K in equation 2.2
is similar for both finite element and finite difference schemes. The heat capacity 0

matrix C is diagonal for the finite difference method. However, C is non-diagonal

for the finite element method, and is called the consistent heat capacity matrix.
Sometimes, a lumped C matrix is used instead in finite element formulations,
which involves unequal distribution of capacitance to each node proportional to
the corresponding nodal volume. Fujii56 has analyzed the finite element method 0.
with both the consistent and the lumped C with regards to accuracy and stability.
He defined the maximum principle which states that negative temperatures cannot
occur when the initial and boundary temperatures are non-negative provided that J
there is no heat sink. Further, the maximum temperature must occur at the
boundary. He concluded that for the maximum principle to hold for the lumped
C approach, the time increment must be sufficiently small. The consistent C is
more restrictive with both upper and lower limits on the time increment. He also
found that the lumped C approach loses its value when high accuracy is required ..

as lumped C does effect overall accuracy. "

2.2.2.2 Integration Schemes

Direct integration methods, rather than the mode superposition method, are
generally used in heat transfer problems in which the solution to equation 2.2 is 0

.. ,..
q~ .. # . . . - ' . - ' wm :
e",," "f " " Jr'
 .0

25
obtained over a number of successive time steps. Thus, in welding heat transfer

problems with thermal history dependent behavior, incremental solutions are

attempted over many time steps, and due to the non-linearities involved, iterations

may also be necessary over each time step to balance the residual 'load' vector.

Although finite element discretisation over the time domain is possible,5 7 finite

difference methods are more widely used. The popular two level methods in use
.'
are the Euler's methods, the Crank-Nicholson central difference method, Wilson-0

method etc., and of the three level methods, the Gear's and Lee's methods have

been used. The choice of the technique is based on the stability characteristics,

the level of accuracy desired, and the largest time step allowed. For problems

involving melting and solidification, the above factors are intimately linked to the

phase change phenomena. The latent heat of melting or solidification is usually

incorporated in the numerical techniques by the following two methods :

i. Specific Heat Method : In this method, the latent heat is incorporated as an

apparent increase in the specific heat of the material over the solidification
range. Although valid for metallic alloys, the method requires the assumption

of an artificial but small solidification range for pure metals with a planar -

phase change. The method results in a sharp discontinuity in th. ,emperature PS

dependent specific heat for metals and alloys, and can lead to undesirable

oscillations of the solidification front. Hsiao5 8 used this method with a special 58

algorithm to avoid missing the release or absorption of latent heat and noted

some improvement. Friedman 9 used a variation of this method by way of an

iteration scheme for incorporating the latent heat directly at each time step.

ii. Enthalpy Method: Comini et al.6 have shown that the enthalpy H given by ".6 %

'N
 26
the relationship
H = pc dT (2.3)

is a much smoother function of temperature than is the specific heat with

the latent heat included over the solidification range. They calculated the

volumetric specific heat from the known enthalpy at a point using an averaging

technique

dH 1 H H ay aI-a-T (2.4)
dT 3 -x aT aYaT azT
where and aSt
where 3,2 are approximated as the inverse of the temperature

gradients in the z, y and z directions. The method results in a more accurate

calculation of the temperature dependent specific heat at any point in the

material. Pham s ' has shown that this method is similar to the one proposed 0

by Hsiao. *..

Explicit methods, in which the heat equilibrium is considered at the present

time step to calculate the temperatures at the next time step, usually do not

have good stability characteristics. Implicit methods on the other hand allow .- .-.

larger time steps because of their better stability characteristics, although they

may require iterations. Myers 6 2 compared the Euler's explicit method and
W,% k ,

Crank-Nicholson's central difference method for a two-dimensional transient heat

conduction problem. He found the Crank-Nicholson's method to be more stable

than the Euler's explicit method at larger time steps than the Euler's explicit
6',',
method. Bathe6 3 analyzed the two level schemes of the type V
t+AtT - tT

where

i. a = 0 is the Euler's forward or explicit method which is first order accurate in

At, ...
 27

ii. u = 1 is the Euler's backward or implicit method which is also first order

accuarte in At, and

iii. a = 0.5 is the Crank-Nicholson's central difference method which is second

order accuarte in At.

By analyzing the integration algorithm of a typical equation in 2.2, he showed

that for stability, the following relationship must be satisfied

1- (1- a) At t+aAtAf <1 (2.5)

1 + aAt t+CIA I-
where A is the eigen value of the equation under consideration. This relationship

holds provided the time step satisfies the condition

<
At 2
At < (1- 2a) t+aAtA"

Thus, the integration scheme is unconditionally stable provided a > 0.5, and is
only conditionally stable for a < 0.5. Wood 6 4 has described the phenomenon

of 'noise' or oscillations that can occur in the Crank-Nicholson scheme thereby

effecting the accuracy, although the solution is stable. Donea s also observed .

severe oscillations in the Crank-Nicholson scheme and found that for fast varying
boundary conditions requiring short time accuracy, an iterative two level Galerkin

process with less severe oscillations was more accurate than the Crank-Nicholson
)S
method. Comini6 used the Lee's three level scheme with unconditional stability
in his formulation to avoid iterations. However, the formulation results in a

recurrence scheme with a solution process involving the inversion of a matrix

containing K and C. For large problems with many degrees of freedom, this ._de

inversion process can become a big constraint with the resulting loss in accuracy.

The above techniques all used the temperature formulation. The alternative

enthalpy formulation has the disadvantage that only explicit schemes can be '..

a- -p ~p e - Jk 0 .- V
 28
used with the related stability problems and the shorter time steps allowed.

Pham 1 used a combination approach with the three level Lee's method. However,

his formulation precluded the consistent heat capacity approach. The Euler's
backward implicit method promises to be the most suitable for welding problems

in metallic alloys due to its unconditional stability allowing larger time steps,

simplicity of formulation with temperature as the unknown parameter, feasibility

of using with either the lumped or the consistent heat capacity matrix, and for

both the specific heat or the enthalpy method for the phase change problems.

The accuracy of the method is good although it has not been well documented

for two-dimensional problems, and therefore was investigated as discussed later in

chapter 4.

2.2.2.3 Weld Heat Source Distribution

Analytical models discussed earlier preclude the use of complex welding heat S
flux distribution, and have been limitted to point/line source or cylindrical heat

sources - both circular and elliptical - of constant temperature boundaries.

Numerical techniques allow much more flexibility in modeling the distribution

of heat flux in the welding arc. Pavelic 14 proposed a gaussian distribution model

in which the specific heat flux q(r) at any radius r about a normal circular heat

source is given by the expression

q(r) =qo e-c. (2.6) ".

Here, qo is the peak specific heat flux which can be determined by integrating the
heat flux over the radius r from 0 to oo, and is equal to where Q is the effective

welding heat input. The constant c in equation 2.6 is determined assuming a

finite upper limit of integration ro where the specific heat flux q(r) drops to a
3J S

negligible value. For a value of 5%, the constant c is - -. Such a gaussian welding
r0
 29
heat source can be included in the numerical model as a boundary heat flux valid
over a region of the surface, or as an internal heat source assumed present over

a small thickness at the surface. Pavelic's model has been applied to arc welding

problems with reasonable accuracy. However, the the model is clearly not valid

for deep penetration electron beam and laser welds.

Goldak et al."9 presented a more complicated double ellipsoidal model for the
weld heat source in which the peak flux q is a function of x, y, z and t and is

described by the expression S

6,/v fQ U2 3 -.- 1v7)t)
q(x, y, z,t) = eVf ez
abc~rv/-F e (2.7)

In equation 2.7, the parameters a, b, c and f can take different values in the front

and rear part of the weld pool and Goldak chose these eight parameters based on

the experimental weld bead profile. He used the model to analyze the heat flow in

a submerged arc weld in a 10 cm thick carbon steel plate, and a deep penetration ,
electron beam weld in 1.95 cm thick steel plate. Although, the predicted weld bead

shape in the submerged arc weld was in good agreement with the experimental

results, the penetration in the electron beam weld was underpredicted by over S

40%.

Majumder et al. 1" and Chande et al.' have presented a three-dimensional

finite difference model for laser welding. They assumed the Beer-Lambert law of

energy absorption for deep penetration laser welds using the relation

e - fy
qy = 1s (2.8) 0

where is the absorptivity coefficient, and qs and qy the power intensities at the

surface and at depth y, respectively. They also assumed that once a particular -C!"
%

node reached the boiling point, it became transparent to the laser beam allowing

VP
' *"Z',%
 30
the next layer to receive the energy with the energy absorption determined by

equation 2.8. The model may simulate the creation of the keyhole and thus the S
initial transient, but is not valid once the keyhole has been established and welding

is in the quasi-steady state.

A model which can more accurately simulate the deep penetration keyhole

laser welds is required and some of the attempts made in this investigation are ..

discussed in later chapters.

2.5 Summary

Aluminum alloys are not being laser welded due to their proneness to porosity,

poor weld bead appearance, and vaporization of alloying elements. Precise control

of the energy input seems to be necessary to improve the laser weldability of

theses alloys. A detailed parametric study of the influence of welding parameters

and alloying content on the weld characteristics , porosity formation and alloying

element loss is required to better understand the phenomena occurring. In

addition, numerical simulation of the laser weld thermal cycle in aluminum alloys

can further enhance the understanding of the mechanisms involved. Present

investigation was carried out to meet some of these objectives.

4oS
 Chapter 3

EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

A 15 kw AVCO CO 2 laser welding machine with F7 optics was used to weld the
aluminum alloys in the down-hand position. Autogenous butt welds were made in

the keyhole mode on 20 x 10 x 1.27 cm (8 x 4 x 0.5 ") plates in aluminum alloys

2219, 5083 and 5456. Bead-on-plate welds were also made in aluminum alloy 6061

on plates of above dimensions in the keyhole mode, and 20 x 10 x 0.4 cm (8 x 4

x 0.16 ") sheets in the conduction mode. All plates were in the annealed condition

prior to welding, except alloy 6061 which was in the T-6 temper. Table 3.1 gives

the nominal composition of the aluminum alloys used.

3.1 Surface Preparation

To eliminate probable sources of hydrogen and other contaminants from the

welds, following surface preparation scheme recommended by AWS was used prior

to welding:

i. Initial washing and scrubbing with detergent to remove dirt followed by drying

to remove moisture.

ii. Mechanical brushing using stainless steel brushes to remove oxide layers.

iii. Cleaning with acetone to remove oil and grease layers.

For butt welds, the plate edges were machined prior to above preparation.

The surfaces were then characterized by depth profile technique using Secondary

Ion Mass Spectrometry (SIMS) for levels of hydrogen, oxygen and carbon in the

cleaned and the as-received conditions of the plate. Plates used for off-focus

I
 0

Table 3.L Nominal composition of aluminum alloys used.

Element 2219 5083 5456 6061

Mg 0.02 max 4.00 - 4.90 4.70 - 5.50 0.80 - 1.20

Cu 5.80 - 6.80 0.10 max 0.10 max 0.15 - 0.40

Mn 0.40 max 0.40 - 1.00 0.50 - 1.00 0.15 max

Si 0.20 max 0.40 max 0.25 max 0.40 - 0.80

Fe 0.3 max 0.4 max 0.40 max 0.70 max

Cr - 0.05 - 0.25 0.50 - 0.20 0.04 - 0.35

Zn 0.10 max 0.25 max 0.25 max 0.25 max

Ti 0.02 -0.10 0.15 max 0.20 max 0.15 max "

V 0.05-0.15 - -

Zr 0.10-0.25 - - -

Others - each 0.05 max 0.05 max 0.05 max 0.05 max ,
Others - total 0.15 max 0.15 max 0.15 max 0.15 max
Al Remainder Remainder Remainder Remainder

0
 3
keyhole welds and conduction mode welds were spray painted black to ensure

coupling. S

3.2 Welding Parameters

Laser power, welding travel speed and the location of laser beam focus with
respect to the plate surface were the main welding parameters investigated in the
welding experiments. Table 3.2 describes the welding parameters used for each

of the aluminum alloys. Welds were made at input power levels in the range of

5 to 14 kw. At each power level, two or three appropriate welding travel speeds
were used in the range of 0.212 to 3.387 cm/sec (5 to 80 inches per minute (ipm))
0
to obtain reasonable weld bead dimensions (ie. partial to full penetration welds).
In alloys 2219, 5083 and 5456, laser welds were made using two different focus

conditions to study the influence of input power intensity on weld characteristics

S
(1) on-focus keyhole welds - the laser beam was focussed on the plate surface,

and (2) off-focus keyhole welds - the laser beam was focussed 0.635 cm above the

plate surface. From spot burns on acrylic plates, the beam spot diameters on the

plate surfaces for the above two cases were estimated to be 0.08 cm and 0.12 cm.

respectively. The keyhole mode welds in alloy 6061 were all made with the beam

focussed on the plate surface. For the conduction mode welds made in alloy 6061

at a separate facility, the beam cross-section obtained was rectangular (0.6 x 0.1

cm) with considerably lower power density. Further, in this setup, the depth of

focus was significantly large compared to the plate thickness, and therefore the

location of the focus was not critical.

Helium gas was used for shielding of the molten weld pool as well as for plasma

suppression. A constant flow rate of 150 cfh was used during the welding trials. As

aluminum welds can result in drop-through due to the high fluidity of the molten

P _
 34
Table 3.2. Welding parameters used.

Alloy Welding Mode Power (kw) Speed (ipm)

2219 On-Focust 5. 10., 15.

5083 Keyhole mode 7.5 10., 20.

& 10. 20., 30., 40.
5456

Off-Focust 4. 10.
5. 10.
6. 10.
7.5 10.
10. 10.

6061 On-Focust 10. 30., 40., 50., 60., 70., 80.

Keyhole mode 11. 40., 60.
12. 30., 40.

Conduction Mode* 7.5 10., 15., 25.

10. 10., 15., 20.
12. 30.
14. 5, 10.

beam focussed on plate surface; plate thickness 1.27 cm.

beam focussed 0.635 cm abov- plate surface; plate thickness 1.27 cm.
* plate thickness 0.4 cm except for 14 kw welds which were made on
plates of thickness 1.27 cm.

"!Si,

. .. .. . . p- -, -
aluminum, all welds were made using a stainless steel backing plate to support the

molten pool.

3.3 Testing

Weld cross-sections were examined using an optical microscope to determine

the weld penetration, top bead width, aspect ratio, and the weld cross-sectional

area. At least three sections were examined for each weld and averaged results

are presented. The weld cross-sectional areas were determined from the macro-

photographs of the welds. The weld profiles were cut out from these pictures and
weighed. From known magnifications of the macro-photographs and the specific

weight of the paper used, the weld cross-sectional areas were calculated. -

The nature and distribution of porosity in the laser welds in aluminum alloys

was studied by microscopic examination of transverse and longitudinal sections

of the welds. To compare the levels of porosity present in the different welds,

the volume of weld metal porosity per inch of weld length was determined by

density measurements. Three specimen of dimensions 3.81 x 2.54 cm (1.5 x 1.0")

were cut and machined from each welded plate, and were then weighed in air and

water. Comparing the results obtained with those from control specimen from the

base metal of each alloy, the amount of porosity in each specimen was calculated.

Assuming the cross-sectional area of the weld to be uniform over the specimen

length, the porosity per unit volume of the weld metal was determined. It is to

be noted that the density measurements give the total amount of voids present in

the weld metal, which may be in the form of gas pores or shrinkage cavities.

Microstructures in the weld metal, the heat affected zone (HAZ) and the parent

metal were examined using optical and scanning electron microscopes. Presence .
of any micro-porosity was also investigated. Electron microprobe analysis were
 36
conducted across the weld cross-sections to evaluate the loss in alloying elements

and segregation patterns in the weld, HAZ and the parent metal.

3.4 Vaporization Studies

As mentioned in section 3.3, loss of alloying elements from the laser welds was
determined for a limited number of welds using electron micro-probe analyzer. "'

Based on the works described in section 2.2.2, 4 5 - 47

an analysis of the vaporization
of alloying elements in laser welds in aluminum alloys 2219, 5083, 5456 and 6061

was carried out. A brief description of the methodology used for developing the

relevant plots is described in the next few paragraphs.

0

Assuming Raoultian behavior, the equilibrium vapor pressure Pi of a solute i ,%'

in solution with solvent j is given by the expression

P9 (3.1)

where z is the mole fraction (x i + xj = 1), and PP the vapor pressure of pure
i at the temperature of the solution. If the component i behaves ideally in the i

solution,
ai -- x i %'
,%.

where ai is the activity of the specie i in the solution. Using the tabulated vapor G

pressure data PP as a function of temperature for metallic elements6" and the

equation 3.1, a plot of equilibrium pressure Pi versus inverse temperature can be

developed for each specie in the binary system of aluminum and the relevant

alloying elements. Assuming negligible interaction effects, a composite vapor

pressure-temperature plot for each of the aluminum alloys 2219, 5083, 5456 and
6061 can be developed. These are shown in figures 3.1(a) to 3.4(a).

IV
 37
Next, the evaporation rates as a function of inverse temperature were
7
determined for each of the species using the following relation given by Dushman

V= 44.33 x Pi.(-M) (3.2)

where Vi is the vaporization rate in gm/cm 2 sec, M i the molecular weight in gins,

and T i the temperature in K. The plots of evaporation rate versus temperature

for the four aluminum alloys are shown in figures 3.1 (b) to 3.4 (b). Only alloying

elements Cu, Mn, Mg and Zn have been included in these plots along with Al

as these have significantly higher activities as compared to other elements in the

alloy.

Next, using the method presented by Cobine and Burger,"8 the evaporation

power as function of temperature was determined using the relation

E,= Vx (L, - All)

E'p (3.3)

where Ei is the evaporation power in watts/cm 2 , L i the latent heat of vaporization

in joules/gm, and AH M the heat of mixing in joules/gin given by the expression

AH1 M _ aR.In -yi

R being the gas constant and -yi the activity coefficient (i). As the data on the
Xi0
heat of mixing as a function of temperature was not available for the systems under
M
consideration, AH was neglected in the calculation of the evaporation powers;
the error involved was determined to be not significant. Plots of evaporation power

versus the temperature are shown in figures 3.1 (c) to 3.4 (c) for the four aluminum

alloys being studied.

The above vaporization plots when applied to the power intensities involved S

in aluminum laser welds can give some important information. For instance, using

t t- 1.,
 "SS

GO.

0
-~ 0

CL.

00 0 p~?

NN

LDi

00

(a -W/W QJMDNUOIDJOdA3

NN

4>

NA

Li 0 .*~.A
 LIi,

US

C>,

ajHuilpd Coc L.OW5

- 0

00

L0
~)
0

C,

Lfll 0 le
 .L7- l M -7 7 - -7K -

40

CN ,*

U'))

DO l 0I

po ro
- 0

100

(~wo/M)
J sM
U~JodDA~
d

__ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ S
 41

o of

6' 0
0 0C

9- 0
C

CIAi

(ZWO/A) JQA~d uoiOjjodOA3

Q) 0

In- .

0
0-

> 4-
0L

0, 00, 0
(or*WJW6 91~ U0!'IDJodDA3

00
N"..C'.i4
-9 D"

- -U0

- 0

~ 0

CD'

oo I

o Do joD
0is~
 42

the plots of evaporation rates vs. temperature as shown in figures 3.1b to 3.4b,

peak temperatures on the weld pool surface can be estimated from experimentally

determined vaporization rates of any constituents. Khan and Debroy 4 6 employed

a similar technique using ratios of vaporization rates of any two species in the weld

pool to predict the peak temperatures in stainless steel welds.

Further, the plots of evaporation power vs. temperature shown in figure 3.1c to

3.4c can be helpful in calculating the temperature profiles around the heat source

using known or assumed distribution of energy in the weld heat source, as was done

by Block-Bolten et al. 4" The dominant specie in the vapor can also be identified 'sq

at the power intensities involved. For instance, at power intensities of 3.54 x 10'

to 1.95 x 106 w/cm 2 involved in laser welding, the dominant specie vaporizing in -*5'

alloy 2219 is aluminum as seen in figure 3.1.c. However, for the other three alloys

under investigation, there is a transition point where the extrapolated aluminum

and magnesium lines intersect as shown in figures 3.2c to 3.4c. At intensities

above this transition point, aluminum vaporization decides the temperature. But,

at intensities below this transition point, magnesium is the dominant vaporization

specie, and will determine the peak temperature. The phenomenon occurring in

the weld pool are therefore intimately related to the power intensity as well as the
-
alloy content. The results obtained from the vaporization studies are discussed in

chapter 5.

,%~,
 43

Chapter 4

FINITE ELEMENT WELD HEAT CONDUCTION MODEL

Analysis of heat conduction in keyhole laser welds in aluminum alloys can

lead to a better understanding of the influence of laser welding parameters on
h%%

the weld bead characteristics. As discussed in chapter 2, the effect of convective

heat transfer in the weld pool on the weld thermal profiles may be neglected for

aluminum laser welds, and heat conduction can be used to predict the weld profiles

with reasonable accuracy. A two-dimensional non-linear finite element weld heat

transfer model was developed to predict the temperature distributions, thermal

gradients and cooling rates in and around the weld. Although finite difference -

method is widely used in solidification studies in casting, finite element method

has been chosen here to solve the weld heat transfer problem as it is more amenable

to the non-linearities involved. In the following sections, the problem statement,

the finite element formulation, and the results of the test problems solved for

verifying the model are presented.

4.1 Problem Statement

The governing partial differential equation for transient heat flow with internal

heat generation is

(k,~ + a(k4~ + (kzj = (4.1)

where T is the temperature, kx, ky and k, the thermal conductivities in the x, y

and z direction respectively, p the density, c the specific heat of the alloy, Q the

internal heat source term, and t the time. In addition, the following relation holds

on the surface:

k,-- q, (4.2)

anS
 44

where n is the direction normal to the surface, and q' the surface heat flux. Surface

heat transfer as described by equation 4.2 can take the following three forms for

a typical welding heat flow problem:

i. Convection heat transfer from the plate surfaces as given by

-q" = he(T- Ta)

where Ta is the ambient temperature, h, the convection heat transfer

coefficient; h, can be determined by the relation

h_ = Nu-g
L9

where A', is the Nusselt number, kg the thermal conductivity of air and L the

characteristic length of the element.

ii. Radiation heat transfer as given by

-q= hr.(T - Ta)

@
the radiation heat transfer coefficient hr being

h, ca(T + Ta)(T + Ta)

where f is the emissivity and o the Stefan-Boltzman constant.

iii. Surface heat flux, eg. the welding heat source, as described in section 2.4.2.3.
0
The two-dimensional heat transfer model described below can be used to

analyze two types of welding problems. Figure 4.1 shows the geometry of the %
planar and the cross-sectional models that can be used with the corresponding

coordinate systems. The planar model is used for full penetration welds in thin

plates, and the heat flow in the thickness direction z is neglected. In such problems,

%" %
 45
V

Hect Source

a. Planar mcdel for thin plctes.

Hect Source

yS

SReeence lcne

w, '*1 Vm

b. Coss-secto.-c! mccel for thick pices.

Figure 4.1 Two-dimensional weld geometry modeled. 0

" ,"r "" , , ""

 46

the complete welding cycle including the initial transients and the end effects can
be modeled. However, for partial penetration welds in thick plates, the cross-
sectional model is employed in which the heat flow in the welding direction z is
neglected. This assumption is valid for high welding speeds relative to the thermal
diffusivity of the material. 9 Only the quasi-steady state conditions of the weld
cycle - away from the end effects - can be modeled by the cross-sectional approach.
Under such steady state conditions, the isotherms reach a steady state around the
welding heat source and travel along the material at the speed of welding. In other
words, following holds' 0

T(x,y,z,t) = T(x,y,z - vt).

Thus, a reference cross-sectional plane is modeled as the welding heat source

approaches and passes over the plane, and the temperature distribution in the
reference plane calculated at each successive time step. The model then allows
a composite of the reference plane thermal histories to be assembled, giving a
three-dimensional picture of the weld pool.

4.2 Variational Formulation

Although both the differential equation approach and the variational approach
can be used for the finite element formulation of the transient heat conduction
problem, the variational approach has been selected for developing this model.
This formulation allows the complicated boundary conditions to be treated p

implicitly, and only the geometric or forced boundary conditions like specified
temperatures need to be explicitly enforced.7 " The formulation used in the
model described below is essentially the same as described by Bathe.6 ' 2 '73 The .

-V! ,.r V
 10

47
applicable functional fl for the variational formulation for the two-dimensional

transient heat transfer problem described in section 4.1 is

11af
k
\VdV[T(Q dV
(1 ( k, + y dV - TC c d
2 axTa a

-TTqqdS +f Tq'dS, (4.3)

s, being the area over which surface heat input occurs, and s2 the area over which

surface heat losses occur. The governing partial differential equation and the S
associated boundary conditions are derived by considering the stationarity of this

functional. Thus, by minimizing the functional, the following integral equation is

obtained describing the heat equilibrium at all times:

t K ,dV
,T' bT q,dS - bT<3 dS +j5T( PC )dV, (4.4)

where

0 ky

and

T( 8T T\
T ax ay)

Direct integration is used for the solution process whereby the time domain is

divided into several small time steps, and the solution is successively obtained at

each time step. Step-by-step incremental equilibrium equations are derived from

equation 4.4 for the solution process, where knowing the temperature distribution

in the material at time t, the new temperatures at the next time increment t + At

are calculated. Euler's backward implicit time integration scheme has been used

where the heat flow equilibrium at time step t + At is considered to solve for

temperatures at that time step. This method has been selected as it guarantees

N
 48
accuracy and unconditional stability. In this time stepping scheme, the time

derivative is approximated as
t- a T- tT "
t+AtTl = t+t T(4.5)

At

The incremental equation described above is non-linear due to the temperature

dependent thermal properties and the boundary conditions involved. The equation 4.
is linearized using the following definitions

t+AtT = tT + AT,

t+AtTI = tTI + AT',

t+AtK - tK + AK,
t+&tp tpc + Apc,

t+&thc,r = thc,, + Ahb,r, (4.6a)

and the following two assumptions:

t+AtK t+&tTI = tK tT/ + t

K AT'

t+A&thc,r (t+&tTs - t+At Ta) = the,r ( tT3 + AT 8 - t+&tTa). (4.6b)

Due to the above simplifying assumptions, an iterative scheme has been

incorporated for each time step to ensure accuracy. The modified Newton-Raphson

iterative scheme has been used in which the coefficient matrices on the left hand

side of the equation are not updated for each iteration. Thus, the temperature at 'r

the ith iteration is given by

t+AtT - t+AtT__ + AT. _

 -W-I NA1K 7 - .7 - 7 LT

49
Incorporating the above linearization and the iterative scheme by substituting

equations 4.6 and 4.7 into equation 4.4 results in

ST' tK AT dV + Is bV th,r AT~ dS

= J T3 t+atqs dS - J 6TS t+Athc,r t+&tT. 1 - t+AtTa dS

r - t - dV (4.8)

Now, the finite element discretisation is introduced whereby the linearized

incremental equations are transformed into a set of simultaneous equations. The

region under consideration is divided into finite sized elements and the heat

equilibrium applied over each of these elements. Two-dimensional quadrilateral

isoparametric elements have been used in the model with a choice of four to eight

nodes. For any element m, the following discretisatioAl is assumed using space S

interpolation functions Hm and the gradient factions Brm as defined in table 4.1

t+AtTm H t+ArT,

mI %
t+AtT3 S 1_t+At~

t4ABTIT. (4.9)Ik

Substituting equation 4.9 into equation 4.8 results in a set of simultaneous

equations of the form

t 1t t+t
K + tc) AT% t+,ti-- t+Atci_ t+Atj (4.10)-

The individual terms involved in equation 4.10 are described in table 4.2. The

integration involved in each of these terms is carried out using the Gaussian

quadrature. Temperature dependent material thermal properties are determined

V.V

% giiiawlilm iiii
 50

ul 0

n +

-~C -l C4

- cC 4 C4
U0
U2
I 3-

C.I C

U CY % p

C12 - I

-~ ~ _U3 vi
.a-~U2
C4 C4

I C-4 4
-~ 2C U - U.
!-Z-

~0 I

o Ri

02r~v
 N.7.

%A

51

Table 4.2. Expressions involved in equation 4.10. ,

Terms Expressions

tK fJv Br'K B dv+ fr th,. H" H, ds

tc ~f,,H" CH dv

t+Ati~ t+At~j tT1I)4

where

t+Atv
-v H t+Mq8 dvs

+AAthrI) ff c,r tH.,ht+&tH

3 H 3~
(t - ttTt ds

t+~t~k~il Br~ t+&tK,_i B3t+&tTi-1 dv

t+&t~ki-'U
 0

at the gauss points based on the temperatures at the previous iteration. The

set of simultaneous equations are then solved for each time step using Gauss-

Siedel method iterating till the maximum temperature increment is within a preset
tolerance limit.

4.3 Weld Heat Source Distribution

Numerical welding heat transfer models using Pavelic's surface heat flux ___

model 14 as described by equation 2.6 have been reasonably successful for modeling

the arc welding processes. This model is not valid for deep penetration welds where
9
the thermal energy is deposited deep inside the material. Goldak et al. used the

double ellipsoid model described by equation 2.7 to solve the thermal flow problem

in a submerged arc weld and an electron beam weld. Although, the results for the

submerged arc weld were satisfactory, the deep penetration electron beam weld

was under-predicted by over 40%. Majumder et al. 1 7 and Chande et al.'" used a

surface gaussian heat source in their three-dimensional finite difference model for

laser welding, with the modification that once a node reached the boiling point,

it became transparent and allowed the laser energy to pass through (reflectivity

0). They assumed the energy absorption to follow the Beer-Lambert's law as

described by equation 2.8. This model may be a good attempt to simulate the

physical phenomenon of the creation of the keyhole. But, it may not accurately

represent the conditions when the established keyhole is traversed relative to the . ..

laser beam, and the energy is deposited deep inside the keyhole.
@

A variation of the above two models was used in the present study, in which

the laser weld heat input was incorporated as an internal heat source rather than *.'. '' ,
a surface flux using the following relation

2 (4.11)
q(r,y) = qo eC' e-C2Y

.
 53 ,
Thus, the heat source was assumed to have a gaussian distribution in the radial

direction and with exponential decay in the thickness direction. Effective radius

and depth of the energy source, r 0 and Yo respectively, were assumed where the

intensity fell to 5% of the peak value. The various constants in the equation 2.8,

calculated by limited the integration to ro and yo, are

3
3Y0 I

qo = a-r-2Q

where o: is the absorptivity of the material to the laser energy, and Q the laser

power input. The internal heat source model described above was used to model

deep penetration keyhole welds in electron beam and laser welding processes, and V

the results are presented in later sections. 0

4.4 Finite Element Program THERM

The two-dimensional non-linear transient heat conduction formulation pre-

sented in the previous section was used to develop a non-linear finite element
in FOR-
thermal analysis program called THERM. The program has been coded

TRAN language and has been developed on a Data General Eclipse MV/10000

system with AOS/VS 7.54 operating system. THERM is also operational on a

VAX 11/782 system operating under VMS version 4.6 operating system. The

program accommodates temperature dependent thermal properties, a finite weld

heat source either as a surface heat flux or as an internal heat source, convection

and radiation heat losses, convection in the molten metal treated as an apparent

increase in the thermal conductivity, and latent heat of fusion treated either as an

apparent increase in the specific heat of the material, or by the enthalpy method.

- ~% ni
 0

54

The program THERM includes a general thermal element library of isopara-

metric quadrilateral elements with a choice of four to eight nodes to model

linear or non-linear heat transfer problems. For the cross-sectional models, the

elements allow either individual edges or combination of two adjacent edges to

have convective or radiative boundaries. For the planar model, either of the two

faces of the elements may have convection or radiation boundaries. The same

holds for the surface heat flux.

The program allows the region being modeled to consist of up to five different

materials. For each of these materials, the temperature dependent thermal

properties like thermal conductivity, volumetric specific heat and the enthalpy may

be specified at up to five different temperatures. The program linearly interpolates

within each of these temperature regimes. The program therefore can also be used

for solving heat transfer and solidification problems in composite materials, which

in addition may have non-isotropic properties.

An example of the program input data set giving the welding conditions

and the material properties is described in the appendix A. Also described is S

an example of the input mesh data set with explanation about the automatic

generation features for nodal coordinates as well as element connectivity in the

finite eiement mesh.

4.5 Testing and Verification of the Model .p.' **

The finite element program THERM was tested for accuracy by solving several

general heat transfer problems, one and two-dimensional solidification problems in

castings, heat transfer in different welding processes like arc welding, submerged

arc welding, electron beam welding and laser welding. The results obtained from

THERM were compared with published analytical, numerical or experimental

W.~~ -0-
 55
results. Following sections present the results of some of the relevant test problems

solved.

4.5.1 Integration Scheme

As mentioned in chapter 2, the time marching scheme most widely used for the

transient heat flow problems is the Crank-Nicholson (central difference) scheme.

However, at large time steps, this method can result in stability problems. Bathe6 3

has shown that the Euler's backward implicit method results in unconditional V

stability. However, he did not present any numerical results to confirm this fact

and the accuracy of this method. Myers 6 2 has compared the finite difference and

the finite element methods using the Crank-Nicholson and the Euler's forward -.

explicit method with respect to the largest time step allowed, accuracy of the

results and the stability of the time marching scheme. He used a transient heat

conduction problem of a square slab of sides I with unequal initial temperature

distribution as described by the equation

t(x,y,o) =-- TO(Lx)for zX>

To for x _Y

The same problem has been used to test the Euler's backward method used in
THERM, and the results compared with those obtained by Myers. The time

marching schemes compared are described by the following expressions

i. Euler's forward (explicit) method : .

,.. .t.

ii. Euler's backward (implicit) method: S

T4+=T + 1 x At. (4.12b)

-1*0 1. .A '- '.

...... . .I ~~~ IOw.-I.
 56

iii. Crank-Nicholson's (central difference) method

S
At (4.12c)

After the usual discretisation procedure of equation 4.1 by either the finite

difference or the finite element method, the following set of simultaneous

differential equations are obtained

CT + K T = R. (4.13)

Incorporating the time stepping schemes shown in equation 4.11 into equation 4.12

results in a set of simultaneous equations of the form

ATi+I = BTi+R X At (4.14)

where the matrices A and B for each of the time marching techniques being tested

are described in table 4.3 below.

Table 4.3. Expressions involved in equation 4.13.

Integration Scheme A B

Euler's explicit C C - K At

Euler's implicit C + K At C

Crank-Nicholson C + K _A- C - K

The vector R in equation 4.12 is a null vector as there is no nodal heat flux in,'.

this problem and the boundary conditions are homogeneous. The time step used

for the different schemes was determined from the relationship

A t-

.. .. .. . .. . : - , -. - . . .: -..:.
::. : S
%
where k is a constant, a the thermal diffusivity assumed constant, and I the

element-dimension - in this case of one element problem, the dimension of the -

slab. Myers has shown that the time step depends not only on the integration

scheme used, the material thermal properties and the mesh size, but also on the

type of element used and the boundary conditions applied.

The solution obtained by the finite element method using the consistent C are

shown in figure 4.2 for the Euler's implicit and the Crank-Nicholson methods. The

figure shows the temperature response at the four corners of the slab as a function
of time for k = 36. The Euler's implicit method shows excellent matching with

the exact solution whereas the Crank-Nicholson's method has a much faster time

response. This tendency is further enhanced for larger time steps represented

by smaller k of 18. For this case, the Euler's explicit method showed severe

instability, whereas the Euler's implicit as well as the Crank-Nicholson were still

stable. However, at k = 9, even the Crank-Nicholson started to become unstable

as seen in figure 4.3, while the Euler's implicit is still stable, although the time

response is slower than at k = 36 or 18. ., -l

All solutions using the finite element formulation converged to a nodal

temperature of T
T a for all four corners just as the exact solution does. But, the

finite difference solutions converged to the inaccurate solution of T. Further,

the time response of the finite difference solutions is much slower than the exact

solution as shown in figure 4.4 even for a small time step corresponding to k -

36. The Crank-Nicholson and the Euler's implicit methods give identical solutions

for the finite difference formulation. At larger time steps, the solutions deviate

slightly from each other, although they are always stable. Only the Euler's explicit
solution became unstable at k = 4. S

...- ..-. , .. , .. ,.....-*....*..... ......-. ,....... .....- :-.........:-...::...._

 5P8

S.

CC

Z! c

0 Z~

uj0- a
-00

.%

CL

I It

L. .O

0% %11 P.

-% 0
%5

% I .' 'NF
v 0,11"
 T V 0*. - 1 VW ' W-I k I K

LO ~

0-'

- CL 0

0, E% -- 4

z.* IA

z u 4)

* ca 'oe

/O - - V.s

N. LO

NN

.wLr.
 60

0 I,

- 0~

I I

Z C.)D C)

-i IIJ 1=

I0 0

I. 4 I .1

II II

0 %
 61

Thus, the Euler's implicit method combined with the finite element method

was found to be accurate and unconditionally stable as compared to the Euler's S

explicit or the Crank-Nicholson's methods. For the finite difference formulation

with the lumped heat capacity matrix, both the Euler's implicit and the Crank-

Nicholson's methods performed equally well.

4.5.2 One-Dimensional Solidification

Weiner 74 presented the analytical solution for a one-dimensional solidification

of a molten half space, which has been used by many researchers for testing and

verifying their numerical heat transfer models. For instance, Comini8 solved the

freezing of water, Hsiao 5 8 presented the solution for solidification of a superheated

liquid, and Hibbit 75 solved the Weiner's problem of solidification of molten steel.

THERM was tested by solving each of these problems with excellent results .

matching with the analytical solutions. Here, the comparison with the Weiner's
problem of steel solidification is presented as it models a simple but realistic

freezing problem. A half space of molten steel initially at a uniform temperature

of 2845 *F is suddenly brought into contact with a half space of chill at a uniform 0

temperature of 70 *F made of the same material. The geometry of the problem

and the finite element mesh of 33 elements and 68 nodes used to model the problem

is shown in figure 4.5. The material thermal properties and the initial conditions

assumed are as follows

- 4
Thermal Conductivity (solid) 4.26 x 10 btu/in sec 'F;

Thermal Conductivity (liquid) 2.13 x10 - 4 btu/in sec 'F;

Vol. Specific Heat (solid) 4.47 x10 - 2 btu/in' 'F; rV.Y

Vol. Specific Heat (liquid) 5.21 x 10 - 2 btu/in3 'F;

Latent Heat of Fusion : 33.56 btu/in;

Solidus Temperature . 2600 'F; <1

0
d 4P

V%e
 62

* U E
0 U

LiU

zL -
0
0.- V
0

0 _ _ _ _ _ _ 0

r0
%

0 0Ile
 63

Liquidus Temperature . 2700 'F;

Initial Temperature of Cast 2845 *F;

Initial Temperature of Chill 70 'F.

Figure 4.6 shows the location of the solidification front as a function of time.

The prediction of the front by THERM is seen to be in good agreement with

the analytical solution of Weiner as well as the finite element solution of Hibbit.

Further refinement of the mesh to 44 elements and 90 nodes did not improve the

solution indicating that the solution has converged. The lumped and the consistent

heat capacity approaches were tested using the medium mesh with no significant

difference. Also, the modified Newton-Raphson's iterative scheme was compared

with the full Newton-Raphson' scheme where the coefficient matrices are updated

for each iteration, again with no significant difference. .

Figure 4.7 shows the temperature profiles in the cast and the chill close to the S

interface at different times. Weiner's analytical solution requires an assumption

of temperature continuity as well as a gradient condition at the interface. The

finite element solution needs no such boundary conditions, but the temperature S

profiles show that the assumption is predicted by the model although the constant

temperature point has shifted slightly into the cast. As the solution must start

with the molten element in contact with the chill to be at same temperature as

the chill, the solidification front initiates some distance from the interface. Over-
%
prediction of the solidus at the initial stages is therefore unavoidable as seen in

figure 4.6. At larger times, the error decreases considerably.

4.5.3 Two-Dimensional Solidification

The next problem with increased complexity is the two-dimensional solidifica-

tion of ingots. A cross-section of the ingot is modeled to predict the location of the

j
. r
":-:'.-:
5 " '- -
....
. ...... ., ._"-,'," :
.. . . .-.-
-- ,'.--,..- " -" "'.'--'-:.''-' - .:'Z-'', '-''. :" " - :: -'"-a *N.
 64

41

LI0

ft c

.. .. .. L .-

= 0

0c
0 E
EE

C14 0
00

~0 %-

0 %

l U01000 0S 4-!osI
 %%0
65 U

000 G

L. CN

cS

0 -

C) C C %

-
N,
 66
solidification front as a function of time for a superheated liquid with convective

boundaries. Lazardis 7 6 has presented a finite difference solution to this problem S

in which the location of the interface is determined by methodically enforcing M
"
the continuity of temperatures in the solid and liquid regions, and a relation for
temperature gradients involving the latent heat of fusion. Hsiao 58 presented a
finite difference solution to the same problem without such a rigorous approach.

THERM was used to solve the problem with excellent matching and the results .
are presented below. 0

A 5' x 5' square quadrant of a large ingot was modeled utilizing the symmetry

in x and y direction. Two different meshes were attempted - one a uniform mesh

of 10 X 10 elements, and the second a non-uniform mesh of 10 x 10 elements, with

smaller elements near the ingot boundary. The material thermal properties and A.
initial conditions assumed are presented below:
S
Thermal Conductivity (solid) 1.0 x 10- ' btu/in sec OF;
Thermal Conductivity (liquid) : 0.9 x10 4 btu/in sec 'F;
Vol. Specific Heat (solid) : 1.0 xl0 - btu/in' 'F;

Vol. Specific Heat (liquid) : 1.0 x10 - 2 btu/in3 'F;

Latent Heat of Fusion : 350 btu/in3 ;
Convection Heat Transfer Coeff. : 2 btu/in2 sec 'F;

Solidus Temperature : 799 F;

Liquidus Temperature : 801 'F;

Initial Temperature of Cast : 1000 'F;
Ambient Temperature : 100 *F.

Figure 4.8 shows the location of the solidification front at times 0.4, 1.0 and -.

2.0 seconds as predicted by THERM using the non-uniform mesh, as well as the

,2., 2,

.00
 67

y"

0S

-%*

-J*

: In
U Ii

AI II

- - - - - I--G
-- -- -

i ),''
/4'P 11%

e No,-

- g(N'- 0 %
 % 00'f

68

solutions of Lazardis and Hsiao. The predicted results are in good agreement with

those of Lazardis and Hsiao.

4.5.4 Thermal Analysis of an Arc Weld

The problem of heat flow and solidification in an arc weld was next solved to

test THERM - especially the routines involving welding heat flux over a section to
7 0 has presented a finite element solution for the
of the boundary. Friedman

longitudinal butt weld in 0.254 cm x 4.0 cm plates of inconel alloy 600 with a

heat input of 703 watts and welding speed of 0.212 cm/sec. A mesh of 67 elements

and 100 nodes, shown in figure 4.9 was used for analyzing the weld; it ensured at

least six elements within the effective radius of the heat source. A uniform time
step of 0.01 sec was used from the start of the thermal analysis till the end. No

iterations were necessary within the time step before melting, and convergence was .. .-,,

achieved usually within three iterations after melting occurred. The temperature

dependent thermal properties and the initial conditions assumed are .

Thermal Conductivity at 300 'K 0.1465 w/cm 'K;

Thermal Conductivity at 1690 0.3756 w/cm 'K; "K

Thermal Conductivity at 1690 OK 0.1878 w/cm OK;

Vol. Specific Heat at 300 'K 3.7678 j/cm3 K;

Vol. Specific Heat at 1690 'K 6.2057 j/cm3 K; -K;

Latent Heat of Fusion : 2604.87 j/cm, .

Emissivity 0.95;

Solidus Temperature : 1630 'K;

Liquidus Temperature : 1690 'K;,

Initial and Ambient Temperature :300 cK.

t

I.- "o
t "or
 69

o Lfl

0 0
- %r
c

.00

%u
**

CD
C/')

0-
r- c>-

C C

< Q- V

Li, i

%C '. e

%%

* c0
 ,"

700

Friedman used Pavelic's disk model of surface heat flux, and assumed the .e

effective radius ro of the arc to be 0.508 cm. He used a simplified approach to S

incorporate the heat flux on the relevant element boundaries - he applied the '.. %

welding heat as a uniform 'pressure' composed of two parts, one constant and the

other varying with time. 7 7 Further, he assumed that the heat flux was applied for

times -ia x 1.5 where v is the welding speed. In the present analysis by THERM,

the heat flux is incorporated more accurately by determining the intensities at each

gauss point of the elements concerned, and using the gaussian quadrature as shown

in table 4.2. Also, as the arc influences the reference plane only when it is r0

distance from the plane, the heat flux was applied only for the duration r
V
seconds

before and after the heat source crosses the reference plane. Thus, Friedman's 0

temperature response is expected to be spread out over a longer duration, and .. "..

have lower peak temperatures. Figure 4.10 shows the temperature response at 0.

and 0.254 cm from the weld centerline at the top and bottom surface of the plate.

The peak temperature predicted by THERM is higher by 280 K at the arc center %

and slightly varying elsewhere.

As mentioned in section 4.1, the cross-sectional model allows the weld cross-

sectional profiles to be calculated at successive time steps as the welding heat

.N,,
source approaches and passes over the reference plane. From a composite of these %

thermal histories, a three-dimensional shape of the molten pool can be obtained.

Using such a composite, the weld pool shapes at the top and bottom surfaces of

the plate was determined and are shown in figure 4.11. Here, the z-axis represents

the longitudinal axis of or the weld travel axis with the origin of the coordinate -

system attached to the center of the weld heat source. Thus z = 0 represents the

location of the arc center with the arc travelling in the negative z direction. It is

to be noted that the maximum bead width occurs slightly behind the arc center,

- ..',
- ,*.-'i', "N,. -",N
 71 I

CN

CL -

00 LO
.C- Cl 2
a---0

'a v
z cc ) 4) /-
(* = = ". "

/ U)

0)

/0 0L

%%

C 00

(>, ai*ida U-

% % %
 00

cop

0 E04

(Uu) t4-~ PD E 90 t0

%.

P6o
 -,. ,,t
,.,,S

,34

and the maximum bead widths at the top and bottom surface do not occur in the

same plane. Figure 4.12 compares the weld profile (liquidus isotherm) predicted by

THERM and Friedman; prediction by THERM differs from Friedman's solution 0

at most by 9%.

4.5.5 Heat Transfer in a Submerged Arc Weld

A submerged arc weld in a 10 cm thick carbon steel plate was modeled

using THERM. Christensen et al."1 has presented experimental temperature

measurements at different locations in and around the fusion zone, as well as

the weld and heat affected zone profiles. The problem has also been solved using

the finite element method by Goldak et al."9 using the double ellipsoid model and

by Krutz7 8 using Pavelic's disk model. The welding conditions are 38.5 kw power,

0.5 cm/sec welding speed with an efficiency of 0.95. For modeling this shallow

weld with a maximum penetration of about 1.3 cm, the surface heat flux model

was used in the THERM analysis with an effective radius r 0 of 2.0 cms. Thermal

properties used are

Thermal Conductivity at 25 'C 0.515 w/cm C;

Thermal Conductivity at 570 C 0.379 w/cm 'C;

Thermal Conductivity at 820 C 0.249 w/cm CC;

Thermal Conductivity at 1482 C 0.317 w/cm CC;

Thermal Conductivity at 1482 C 1.268 w/cm C;

Vol. Specific Heat at 25 'C 3.476 j/cm3 0
C;

Vol. Specific Heat at 450 C 4.667 j/cm3 C;

Vol. Specific Heat at 750 'C 6.619 j/cm3 C;

Vol. Specific Heat at 940 C 5.070 j/cm3 0 C;

Vol. Specific Heat at 1550 C 5.863 j/cm 3 C;

Latent Heat of Fusion . 2100 j/cm3 ; , ,.

J
 0 L0

Li I
0

-- C- C-

L~J )

S II - ~ %

EO v

-oA

1Z.K
11Nb.

U %-

p oor r e
%~~ ~~ ~ ~6 ... S
 rYVV1

Emissivity : 0.9;

Solidus Temperature : 1427 'C;

Liquidus Temperature . 1482 "C;

Initial and Ambient Temperature 25 'C.

Figure 4.13 compares the calculated weld and HAZ profiles with the exper- .N
imental results of Christensen; the predictions are in good agreement with the

experimental results. Figure 4.14 shows the temperature profiles on the top surface

of the plate 11.5 seconds after the arc has passed the reference plane. Again, the

calculated temperature profile compares favorably with the experimental results.

4.5.6 Weld Profile in an Electron Beam Weld -

The next problem analyzed was an electron beam weld in 1.95 cm thick carbon

steel plate, and results compared with those of Goldak et al." with the double

ellipsoid model and the experimental results of Chong"9 . The power used was 2.8

kw, the welding speed was 0.53 cm/sec, with a process efficiency of 0.95. The..-"

effective radius of the gaussian electron beam was assumed to be 0.0508 cm, and

the effective depth of the internal heat source model was assumed equal to the

plate thickness. A finite element mesh of 137 elements and 172 nodes was used

for modeling the 6.8 cm wide plate, with a finer mesh of element size 0.02 cm

near the weld source, and a progressively coarser mesh away from the weld zone.

Same temperature dependent material properties as assui.ied for the submerged "-" -

arc weld were used in this problem.

Figure 4.15 and 4.16 show the weld profiles and the heat affected zone

profiles as predicted by THERM compared to the predictions of Goldak and the

experimental results. It is seen that the THERM predictions match well compared

%
-t&. ;f" A
%
 76

%tp

Q U,

3r C
CQ)

f, %-

,- C)

C)p < Q0 e

m M

CN)

I-I

C)%
 1Ik

V Lo

w LI f

-I 00

I LO
I C.)

0 0 0
C14)

(oo) o

, %P %
,^ %- %
 78

0 Go

Cl

CC)

-~~ - -0 A
0 61

w 41

% % S
AS
.
 0 id

)( 0 0

C L C

UL N N N

C..,
<E <

C14,

<~ ,

C14 U ( co co

r4V
(Ujuj) UOIID I;D0.

.. .. .. ......
 ,'*1 , '.

80

to the experimental results with regards to the weld penetration, top bead width
NO

as well as the HAZ profiles.

4.5.7 Laser Weld in Stainless Steel

Locke et al. 8" have presented experimental results of high power deep

penetration laser welds in type 304L stainless steels over a wide range of power

settings. THERM was used to model one of these welds made with 8 kw laser

power and 1.27 cm/sec (30 ipm) welding speed on a 3 inch plate. The effective ,

radius of the laser beam was assumed to be equal to the beam spot radius of

0.0508 cm as reported by Locke. A finite element mesh of 136 elements and 170

nodes consisting of four and five node elements was used for modeling the 10.0 cm

wide and 1.0 cm thick plate. The material properties used are

Thermal Conductivity 0.189 w/cm K;

Vol. Specific Heat : 4.000 j/cm3 OK;

Latent Heat of Fusion : 1997 j/cm%;

Emissivity : 0.9;

Solidus Temperature : 1673 -K;

Liquidus Temperature . 1723 'K;

Initial and Ambient Temperature 300 OK. ',-

Thermal conductivity in the molten pool was assumed to be four times that in

the solid material to approximate the convection in the molten pool. An effective

energy absorption factor of 50% was used for this weld. The weld cross-section as "

predicted by THERM is compared with the experimental result of Locke in figure

4.18. The weld penetration as well as the top bead width predicted in very good

agreement with the experimental results. The model does not exactly predict the

"+',
... +'
,,+-,,
,.,. ,. +,.r..,
-+ ,+ m '+ + ++
,,,,,+.%.
 814

wuj x.

I 0LL

co

*%.
 82

nail-head shape of the actual weld, but the cross-section predicted is reasonably

close.

4.6 Summary

The finite element weld heat transfer model THERM has been tested for

accuracy by solving many problems in heat transfer and solidification as well

as by analyzing numerous welding problems. The welding heat transfer problems

solved covered a wide range of input power levels as well as power intensities,

and varied from thin section full penetration welds to partial penetration welds

in thick plates. The results predicted by THERM match well with the published

experimental and numerical results. The model has been used for analyzing the 0

laser welds in aluminum alloys and the results are presented in the next chapter.

.1
 83

Chapter 5

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

High power CO 2 laser welds were made in the four aluminum alloys over a wide

range of welding parameters as described in chapter 3. Generally, laser welding

of aluminum alloys was found to be very erratic with poor reproducibility. In the

5xxx alloys, violent eruptions frequently occurred during welding, and the weld

cycle was accompanied by an intense plasma at the plate surface. In the conduction

mode welds in alloy 6061 and the lower power off-focus welds in alloys 2219, 5083

and 5456, the coupling between the laser beam and the material was sometimes

lost during welding. Therefore, all the conduction mode and the off-focus welds
were made with the plate surface spray painted black to ensure coupling. Defects

mainly observed in the laser welds were porosity, shrinkage cavities and undercuts.

Solidification cracks were occasionally found in the laser welds in 1.27 cm thick

6061-T6 plates both in the conduction and keyhole modes. This alloy is prone ON

to solidification cracking due to the low melting point intermetallic compounds

containing Mg and Si. The problem is usually avoided using a proper filler metal

of the type 4083 with high Mg, and this aspect was not investigated.

Laser welds in aluminum alloys were characterised with regards to the weld

bead shape and dimensions, the nature and amount of porosity, alloying element

loss from the weld fusion zone, and the weld microstructures using the testing

procedures described in section 3.3. The melting and solidification phenomena in

the laser welded aluminum alloys were also simulated using the two-dimensional

finite element heat transfer program THERM described in chapter 4. The results

of the experimental characterization and the numerical simulation of the laser

welds are discussed in this chapter.

.4
 84
5.1 Weld Bead Shape and Dimensions

The weld bead shape and dimensions described by the weld penetration, weld

top bead width, aspect ratio, weld cross-sectional area, and the overall process

efficiency are presented in the following sections in terms of the welding parameters

for each of the alloys and the laser welding modes investigated.

5.1.1 Weld Penetrations

Weld penetrations obtained in the laser welds in aluminum alloys are shown

in figure 5.1. As expected, weld penetration increases with increasing laser power

and power intensity, and with decreasing welding speed. However, considerable

variation in the weld penetration was observed in the laser welds among the

different aluminum alloys. Alloy 2219 had the minimum weld penetration (figure

5.1a), and the 5xxx alloys the maximum (figure 5.1b and 5.1c) for similar welding

conditions. For instance, as shown in figure 5.1a and 5.1b for the on-focus laser

welds, weld penetration in alloy 2219 was 0.31 to 0.41 cm at 5 kw and 0.74 to %j,

0.88 cm at 10 kw, as compared to alloy 5083 which had 0.83 to 1.03 cm at 5

kw and 1.14 to 1.21 cm at 10 kw. The decrease in the weld penetration with

reduction in laser power from 10 kw to 5 kw was rather pronounced for alloy 2219.

Further, the weld penetration was not uniform throughout the weld length, the
S
average standard deviation (ASD) being 0.05 cm for alloy 2219 and 0.12 cm for
the 5xxx alloys. The variation in penetration along the weld length showed some
periodicity in the 5xxx alloys as seen in the longitudinal sections shown in figure

5.10. In addition, on-focus laser welds in alloy 6061 showed considerable scatter

in the weld penetration data as seen in figure 5.1d. %

The conduction mode welds in alloy 6061 showed a strong dependence of weld

penetration on the plate thickness as shown in figure 5.1e. In the 0.4 cm sheets,

fJ
 85

C'4.

E -

c 0

4 00

Ln - u
cli r.-

(a)O .O)J~~dP2

Ita It) t C) ut

(w~~~) PI) UO'Ml9~

EN

Lnn

0~

<1 0-

00

U) (IfO ijD 4Pu If) -0

040
(wa)
PQ) or~o;,us

aM .M
n1) CD

Q.)

/N 0
0

(WOD) UOIIDJIQUQd PIQA

 %XIWAK vw I I W N. N, 7K

86

Q) 1

C) -W _r

to I

0 Q)

00

(wo) U0IjDJj~ua PIa,

(NN

U0

ai .3 q

U L O U) L) .0S

(WO~) UOID0JIU~d PIDA

0))
000 C!

CNC

(Io 001JG
 87

the weld penetration was in the range of 0.2 to 0.4 cm for power levels of 7.5 to

12.0 kw and welding speeds of 0.423 to 1.27 cm/sec (10 to 30 ipm). The weld

penetration levelled off to about 0.2 cm at the higher welding speeds. However,

for the conduction mode welds on 1.27 cm plates, the weld penetration obtained

was only 0.15 to 0.2 cm even at a higher power level of 14 kw and lower welding

speeds of 0.212 to 0.423 cm/sec (5 to 10 ipm).

The off-focus welds in alloys 2219, 5083 and 5456 were made at different

power levels using a constant welding speed of 0.423 cm/sec (10 ipm). These

welds provided some information regarding the transition from conduction mode

to keyhole mode of welding in aluminum alloys. From figure 5.1f, it is seen that

the weld penetration in alloy 2219 increased from less than 0.1 cm at 7.5 kw to

0.69 cm at 10 kw, indicating such a transition. For the 5xxx alloys, no keyhole

was formed at 4 kw for which the weld penetration was 0.13 cm. At power levels

greater than 5 kw, the weld penetration increased to almost full penetration at 10

kw.

5.1.2 Weld Top Bead Widths

The weld top bead widths in laser welds in aluminum alloys are shown in figure

5.2, and the data generally follows the trends observed for weld penetration. The

bead widths were found to be in the same range for alloys 2219, 5083 and 5456 at .

laser power levels of 7.5 and 10.0 kw as seen in figures 5.2a to 5.2c. However, at 5.0

kw, the bead widths in alloy 2219 are considerably smaller. The variations in bead

widths along the weld length were of the same order for all alloys (ASD of about IV

0.07 cm). The on-focus welds in alloy 6061 showed the minimum bead width as

seen in figure 5.2d. The scatter in the bead width data was also considerably less

than in the penetration data for this alloy. 0

I
 TIMP Mr.c

88

CN

E -

- LO

0>0
0
f< 0

CC C 0 E

(WO) qlp'k poag dol

000

- 0

- c

C*

C 0

If) * I) ) It It)-0 -

ON
c 0.
00

Ec <

U 00

IVV
 6w. Sw

C-i.~ C>)

-C C

W~Q CN

.4 0;
a]

(UwO) L,P!A P008 doi

C..4

E Q

(D

. 0

It)t-

CD.-o

(LUO) 'L.P!U P098 do1

u c
o 0 0
WN-
6 -

C.) (D 0.
/) * :3C1

LO %m
c 0.

0 o 0
<. 0 %!

C) _ Cs

(WO) q)P!A PD09 dl

% %?
 90

The conduction mode welds in alloy 6061 showed decrease in bead width with

welding speed, but showed no significant dependence on the laser power. Again,

the thickness effect was very significant as seen in figure 5.2e. The bead width

data in off-focus welds was also consistent with the earlier observations regarding

the transition from conduction mode to keyhole mode as seen in figure 5.2f. Weld

top bead widths in the off-focus laser welds ranged from less than 0.16 cm in 5 kw

welds in alloy 2219 to over 1.4 cm in 10 kw welds in alloys 5xxx. The very large

bead widths in the 10 kw off-focus laser welds result from the low welding speed

of 0.423 cm/sec (10 ipm) used.

5.1.3 Aspect Ratios

From the data on weld penetration and top bead widths, the aspect ratios

of laser welds (penetration to width ratio) were compared among the alloys and

welding modes. Figure 5.3 shows the range of aspect ratios obtained in the four

aluminum alloys. Alloy 6061 showed the best ratios ranging from 0.99 to 1.36,
whereas alloy 2219 had the lowest ratios in the range 0.61 to 0.78. For alloy 5xxx,

the ratio was close to 1.0 and ranged from 0.85 to 1.27. The off-focus keyhole

welds had slightly lower ratios than the on-focus keyhole welds. The conduction

mode welds in all the four alloys had aspect ratio of about 0.4.

Laser welds in aluminum alloys exhibited much smaller aspect ratios as S

compared to laser welds in steels which can have aspect ratios in the range of

4 to 5. Aluminum laser welds resemble more the plasma arc welds in steels. Alloy

6061 with the smallest top bead widths for similar welding conditions resulted in
the best aspect ratio, whereas alloy 2219 with the smallest weld penetration also

had the smallest aspect ratio. eV

I
 91

=E 2

LO 0

EE

000

V)

C14)
ll'S

oijo8loods
 92
5.1.4 Weld Cross-sectional Areas

Although weld penetration and bead width data are important in selecting the ,

weld parameters and for design considerations, the influence of welding parameters

on the weld cross-sectional area gives more information on the process efficiency

and absorption characteristics of the material. Figure 5.4 shows that the data

on weld area for the different aluminum alloys and welding modes is consistent

with trends observed earlier in the penetration and bead width data. Weld area

increases with laser power and decreases with welding speed. Alloys 2219 and 6061

had the minimum weld area, and the 5xxx alloys the maximum for the keyhole
welds. For instance, in 7.5 and 10 kw on-focus keyhole welds in alloy 2219, the

weld area was about 58.8 to 69.6% of weld areas in alloy 5456; at 5 kw it was even 0
lower (12.6 to 21.8%). Weld areas measured for off-focus welds in alloys 2219 and ,

5xxx also confirmed the transition from small conduction mode welds to larger

keyhole welds as seen in figure 5.4f.

5.1.5 Process Efficiencies

The overall welding process efficiency for the aluminum laser welds was

determined by calculating the quantity of heat (ho) required to heat and melt

the volume of weld metal per cm of weld length. The ratio of h0 to the total laser

heat input h i per cm of weld length (h- = P--e) is defined here as the process
efficiency. Thus, the process efficiency is given by the expression

v(cAT + H)
power/speed S

where v is the volume of the weld metal per unit length of weld, c the average .

volumetric specific heat, AT the difference between the ambient temperature and
the melting point, and H the latent heat. 'U'

,o
'U-.):
 93 d9 QJ

It'

I.) U -'

0 A

It) 1 It) 0 a .0)

000

I n 0
m0

0 - E

Loo LO LO E

C) U

00

bsN 00opa

I 0
0 .1-
 94

.04 C, S
C14 U' __

CN W
-k LOnq

CVV

0 0 01: 0

< u

.1.

kn * n U") It) Q)
* N -CNJ

(uzo bs) oa.jy pI8 M

''3 ~. *

__O -O Ul

la b.. o.v C)u

.~I -r r T, ~
 Figure 5.5 shows the plots of process efficiency in laser welds in aluminum

alloys. In on-focus laser welds, process efficiency increased with laser power, but

showed no consistent trend with respect to the welding speed. Keyhole laser

welds in alloy 5456 showed the highest process efficiency of 30 - 33% at 10 kw,
and between 18 and 24% at the lower power levels. Alloy 5083 showed slightly

lower process efficiencies, but with similar trends as alloy 5456. For alloy 2219,
process efficiency decreased drastically from 20 - 23% at 10 kw to only about 2 -

5% at 5 kw indicating that the 5 kw welds were conduction mode welds. In on-

focus welds in alloy 6061, the process efficiency ranged from 17 - 25% at all power

levels investigated, whereas in the conduction mode welds in the same alloy, the

process efficiency was always less than 5%, and generally decreased with welding

speed. Off-focus welds showed a wide range of process efficiencies from as low as

0.6% in conduction mode welds in alloy 2219 to over 20% in keyhole welds in alloy

5083.

The process efficiency plots in figure 5.5 show some inconsistencies. For

instance, 77 decreases with welding speed at 5 kw, but at 7.5 kw, 7 increases
with welding speed. At 10 kw, a maximum q is observed at 1.27 cm/sec (30 0

ipm). The calculation of 7 involves the volume-of weld metal v per unit length of

weld, which is dependent on the welding speed and the laser power as discussed in

section 5.1.4. However, the role of the welding parameters on the weld volume is
rather complex. At low welding speeds, a larger amount of heat loss occurs due to

conduction with resulting low 77. Similarly, at high welding speeds, the 17 is lower

as there is insufficient time for the material to react. The weld metal volume v is-

expected to be the maximum at the optimum welding speed which is a function of

the laser power. This manifests as the apparently inconsistent behavior observed
 96

LO

-4) 0
0 1

c0

O~~ C ) LO O

CAOUIOI;J3 SGOOJd :

U C
0i4 .0 -

W LQ 0

0 U)

E' 0

< 00

in 0 LO) 0 fl 0 l c
PI N (N (D-

C)AOU'O';Jj3 SS9QOd pI

-4

U _ 3

E o
CL

Ln
0
.) <

pi C .N

I-
 97

CNN
LO In It

c 0

I -d C)J
(~) Au~io~j3
S~0.J

09

U-0 CD O a -O

C-4

A (I)

00

< u

'0

C: 13

040
CL :

0.E)
0
0v A.0

0 -0

C 1)J)b ~ fl
ft'~ - ~ ~ 4

In CN C

A~uQOl~i SSDO~d!Z9

.ftr
 98
in figure 5.5. A schematic of the expected behavior of process efficiency is shown

in figure 5.6.

5.1.6 Summary

Aluminum alloy 2219 showed considerably lower weld penetration than the
5xxx series alloys or the alloy 6061. As mentioned in section 2.1.3, the balance

of forces at the bottom of the keyhole given by equation 2.2 relates the vapor

pressure P, with the cavity depth h. Due to the presence of volatile elements
like magnesium, alloys 5xxx are expected to result in higher vapor pressure at

the bottom of the cavity than in alloy 2219 for similar welding condition (see

figures 3.1 to 3.3). Thus deeper cavities are expected with consequently higher

weld penetrations in the magnesium containing aluminum alloys.

Generally, the laser welds in aluminum alloys exhibited much larger bead

widths than observed in steels or titanium. The higher thermal diffusivity of

these alloys is a key factor in causing such large bead widths. Further, the energy

required to melt a unit volume of weld metal in aluminum is about 30% of that

required for steels. The laser welds generally depicted a nail head shape with

large bead width at the top surface which reduced rapidly to less than half the top

width at depths slightly below the plate surface (see figure 5.9). One of the causes

of such a weld shape is believed to be the reradiation of energy from the plasma .-
generated at the plate surface. In addition, the laser optics also influences the

weld profile obtained. The focal lengths resulting from electromagnetic focusing

in EB welding are much longer than in laser welding. The shorter focal lengths

involved in laser systems in turn result in larger beam divergence angle, and the

power intensity decreases rapidly away from the focal spot. . ,

r
 -4-

CN Q)

C:

Q-
_00
u-
0

Q))

0)0

*00

0))
u)

L-
SSQOO0)
 100

Weld bead dimensions described in the last few sections showed that the laser
welds in aluminum alloys ranged from conduction mode to keyhole welds. The
overall welding process efficiency data was used to classify the welding mode for
each of the welds. The on-focus welds in alloy 5xxx and 6061 had process efficiency
better than 17%. However, alloy 2219 exhibited a process efficiency of only 5% or
less for the 5 kw on-focus welds as compared to over 13% efficiency at 7.5 kw and
over. Absorptivity of these aluminum alloys is in the range of 5%, and it improves
considerably once the keyhole is formed. The weld bead dimensions as well as
process efficiency data in off-focus welds in alloys 2219 and 5xxx also showed a
transition from conduction mode to keyhole mode. Thus, a process efficiency value
of about 5% was defined as a threshold below which the welds were classified as
conduction mode welds and above which the welds were classified as keyhole welds.
Using such a criteria, the threshold power intensity for keyholing for alloy 2219 was
estimated to be 6.63 x 105 to 8.84 x 105 w/cm 2 . Similarly, the threshold intensity
for alloys 5xxx is in the range of 5.3 x 105 to 6.63 x 10s w/cm2. In conduction
mode welds in alloy 6061, no keyhole was formed even at 14 kw, and therefore,
2
the threshold intensity is greater than 2.33 x 105 w/cm .

5.2 Characterization of Surface Hydrogen

The main cause of porosity in arc welds in aluminum alloys is hydrogen as

described in section 2.1.2. To reduce the possibility of hydrogen contamination of
the laser weld pool, the plate surfaces were thoroughly cleaned prior to welding
using a surface preparation procedure recommended by AWS and described in
section 3.1. The plate surfaces were then characterised using the depth profile
technique by SIMS to ascertain the effectiveness of the surface preparation. An
8 kv, 50 mA beam was used for sputtering the surface at a vacuum of i0 -

torr. A typical depth profile for aluminum alloy 5083 for both the as-received and
 101 I
cleaned surfaces is shown in figure 5.7. The x-axis represents the sputtering time
S
in minutes, and the y-axis represents the detected intensity in counts per second

(c/sec) of the different specie being investigated. To determine the actual hydrogen

content present, standard specimen of each alloy with known levels of hydrogen are

required. Further, the depth of sputtering may not be uniform among the alloys

as the sputtering rate varies with the alloying content. As standard specimen were

not available for the four aluminum alloys, the relative intensity of hydrogen with

respect to aluminum was compared for the two surface conditions for each alloy

to study the influence of the surface preparation.

The intensity of hydrogen (+) has a maximum (peak) value at the outermost

surface, and it drops to a lower (base) value within a few angstroms in the material

as shown in figure 5.7. The peak and the base values of the relative hydrogen

intensities are compared for the as-received and cleaned surfaces for each of the
alloys in figure 5.8. The surface preparation procedure has significantly reduced

the hydrogen intensity at the outer surface. Further, although the peak and base

values of hydrogen intensities vary considerably among the four alloys in the as

received condition, the base levels are quite uniform among these alloys in the

cleaned condition, thereby allowing the volume of porosity to be compared for the

different welding conditions.

1%'

5.3 Porosity in Aluminum Laser Welds

Figure 5.9 shows transverse sections of typical laser welds obtained in the

aluminum alloys showing the kind of porosity observed. In Lhcyholc welds

in the copper containing alloy 2219 as well as the Mg-Si containing alloy 6061,

occasional shrinkage cavities were observed which were sometimes as large as 0.3
to 0.4 cm in diameter and usually located near the middle of the weld. Otherwise,

U.':l_.
%iS ;
 102

Is

I-G

to

as 3 s it* 3 .,

a~ 2

AIM2
 1031

0)

C.)4

co 2

L) 0

1)

0 C)0 %t

too

2 L-

a)/3 BIS0u

F.R pu- K,
 104

a. Alloy 6061
10 kw
1.27 cm/sec c .
(30 i pm) t

b. Alloy 5456
10 kw
0.843 cm/sec
(20 ipm)

C. Alloy 5083
10 kw
0.843 cm/sec
(20 ipm)

10 kw
0.843 cm/sec-
(20 ipm)

Figure 5.9 Transverse sections of on-focus loser welds

showing porosity and cavities.
 * I.

105
these alloys did not exhibit any significant porosity under microscopic examination
S
of transverse sections even at high magnifications. However, the keyhole welds in
Mg containing alloys 5xxx contained large amounts of spherical porosity with pore

diameters ranging from 0.01 cm to over 0.3 cm. The larger spherical pores were

usually clustered near the top surface of the weld bead, and the smaller pores

distributed throughout the weld. In addition, these welds also contained frequent

large cavities trapped in the middle of the weld. The off-focus keyhole welds in

alloys 2219, 5083 and 5456 also showed similar results to on-focus keyhole welds.

However, the off-focus conduction welds in alloy 2219 as well as the conduction

mode welds in alloy 6061 were generally free of any kind of porosity or shrinkage
cavities. The 5xxx series alloys exhibited distributed small pores of about 0.01 cm

diameter even in the off-focus conduction mode welds.

Longitudinal sections of the welds shown in figure 5.10 reveal the worm-hole
nature of the porosity, as well as the severity of porosity in the 5xxx series alloys. %

Only primary porosity was observed in aluminum laser welds. No secondary

interdendritic porosity was observed during microstructural examination in any

of the alloys. The volume of porosity determined from the density measurements

is presented in figure 5.11. Porosity measurements by such techniques are usually

accurate to within 0.5%. Alloy 2219 contained the minimum amount of voids

present, whereas alloys 5xxx had the maximum. Following paragraphs briefly

describe the observations regarding the porosity data for the different alloys.

5.3.1 Alloy 2219

As mentioned above, this alloy showed the least amount of porosity, in the %

range of 0.019 to 0.067 cc per linear inch of weld. Figure 5.11a shows that at

laser power levels of 5.0 and 7.5 kw, porosity increased with welding speed, and at

,, . I .,, , " " , ' " , *' 5 , %' P %

 106

a3.Alloy 2219 zoi r

(30 ipnl) S-

b.>A 08 Ally

10 kw-
02
-

1.2
Aloy503 '

(30 i pm)

c. AllIoy 5456 z
10~ kw .

1.27 cm/sec
(30 i pm)

Figure 5.10 Longitudinol sections of on-focus loser welds

showing cavities and uneven penetration.
 1071

C4

V)

0 ~%
c ~0 U

(oo) Ajisojod jo PUflIOA

E

-~ coc
-
-n --

00

0 0 0

(~~~~)C
O~uno~,- Acoo
<o
0\**

C4
~'

atO r, C)a
-z
0

E -

(Io

w 0

(0)A~ISO.JOd ;o awnOA
 108

-ft
E
C)

'4 D- ,
00

< 0)

0
; o~. o w n l. ojCO~

(~) ~'i~~o~
O 9Wl~Ou

CL)
PI)~

1))
-- 0

V) (D
0 A.t.

0 0~

01 -
0 LO

(A-~ISOjOd ;o awrngOA

U-% %

%,r.
4."
 . %
.%

109

10.0 kw the trend was opposite. Moreover, porosity at 5.0 kw was the minimum,

whereas at the higher power levels investigated, porosity was about equal. The

variation in porosity along the weld length was very small, the average standard

deviation (ASD) being 0.0091 cc.

5.3.2 Alloys 5xxx

Alloys 5083 and 5456 had higher levels of porosity in the range of 0.09 - 0.36

cc as seen in figures 5.11b and 5.11c. Porosity decreased with increasing welding

speed at all power levels unlike in alloy 2219. Also, maximum porosity was found

at the lowest power level of 5.0 kw. The variation along the weld length was also

found to be relatively higher (ASD of 0.037 cc).

5.3.3 Alloy 6061

Porosity was observed only in the keyhole welds, and was in the range of 0.08

to 0.16 cc (see figure 5.1ld - note that the welding conditions are slightly different

from the earlier welds). In general, porosity decreased with increasing welding

speeds. However, the data showed large scatter. -

5.3.4 Off-focus Welds

In the off-focus kevhole welds made at a welding speed of 0.423 cm/sec (10 B

ipm), porosity increased with increasing power for all the alloys as seen in figure

5.11e. Only in the 5xxx non-keyhole welds, a small amount of micro-porosity was

observed in the low power conduction mode welds.

5.3.5 Summary

Conduction mode welds in alloy 6061 as well as the low power off-focus welds

in the other three alloys were generally free from porosity and large cavities. The

r
 110

surface preparation regimen used to prevent hydrogen contamination of the weld

pool was found to be effective by the depth profile techniques using SIMS. It is

reasonable, therefore, to assume that the porosity and voids observed in aluminum

laser welds are not caused by hydrogen. Porosity and cavities were observed only

in the keyhole mode welds at higher laser intensities. These keyhole welds are

dominated by the vaporization of elements from the weld pool and the formation

of vapor column.

In 5xxx series alloys, the weld penetrations were found to have cyclic variations
with a frequency of about 4 to 8 hz as seen in figures 5.10b and 5.10c. This variation

of over 15% in weld penetration is attributed to the instability of the keyhole

in these alloys. For a partial penetration weld, the condition for stability at the

bottom of the keyhole is given by the expression

PV = 2 + pg h,

2
aid at a depth of x from the plate surface by the expression

-=-+pgz.
r

Assuming that the vapor pressure increases linearly from 0 at the plate surface to

P, at the bottom of the cavity, the condition for a stable keyhole is given by a 7-A
maximum depth of cavity -A
"-...
.' .. ' -,.

hmaz r x Pv(h)
(a + p r g x)

If the cavity depth is larger than hmaz, the cavity collapses with th liquid metal
closing the cavity at the depth x. The laser beam then impinges the liquid

metal and the cycle of keyhole formation and collapse repeats at the characteristic

frequency.

Irb
 Iil

Such an oscillating and unstable keyhole is believed to result in parts of the

S
cavity getting trapped in the solidifying metal, resulting in the large amount

of cavities present in the laser welds in alloys 5xxx. In the alloy 2219, there

is no evidence of an unstable keyhole, and the weld penetration does not vary

significantly over the length of the weld as seen in figure 5.10a. This alloy

consequently contained much smaller amounts of voids present in the form of "

shrinkage cavities.

5.4 Vaporization of Alloying Elements

The vaporization of alloying elements in the weld metal due to laser welding
0
was investigated for a few selected welds using the electron micro-probe analyzer

(EMPA). To compare the gross change in composition in the weld metal due to

welding, numerous random spot measurements were made in the base metal as

well as the weld metal. Due to the microstructural heterogeneity in the aluminum

alloys, use of small beam spot of one micron diameter usually gave erroneous

results. Thus, the random spot measurements were made using a larger beam

spot of 20 microns. At least ten measurements were taken for each weld to ensure

accuracy. The error involved in the EMPA measurements is usually of the order

of 2% of the measured value. Laser welding of aluminum alloys caused significant

S
changes in the weld metal compositions, and the results of the alloying element

loss are presented in the following paragraphs.

5.4.1 Alloy 2219

The most significant change in the composition (weight percentage) in the weld

zone in alloy 2219 was in the two major species aluminum and copper. Table 5.1

shows the chemical composition of the base metal and the on-focus laser welds.

@
 112

It is seen that weld metal is significantly enriched in copper and is depleted in

aluminum as compared to the base metal.

Table 5.1. Weld metal Composition in alloy 2219.

Weld A] Cu Fe Mn Si Ti

Base metal 93.04 5.75 0.10 0.35 0.08 0.05

10 kw, 20 ipm 91.55 6.84 0.15 0.33 0.07 0.04

(# 104)
10 kw, 30 ipm 92.00 6.82 0.06 0.33 0.097 0.04
(# 102)
10 kw, 40 ipm 92.00 6.89 0.15 0.32 0.09 0.05
(# 103) 1
7.5 kw, 10 ipm 92.11 6.70 0.09 0.30 0.08 0.08

7.5 tw,120 ipm 92.53 6.78 0.18 0.31 0.10 0.04

(# 105)
5 kw, 10 ipm 91.30 6.86 0.09 0.32 0.08 0.07
(# 108)
5 kw, 15 ipm 92.07 6.70 0.08 0.30 0.07 0.07
(#107) ;___

Depletion of aluminum from the weld metal in alloy 2219 is expected. Vapor

pressure of aluminum is almost two orders of magnitude higher than copper in

the melting point to boiling point range of aluminum and beyond as shown

in figure 3.a. Also, from figure 3.1c, for the range of input power intensities

involved, aluminum boiling determines the weld pool peak temperatures, and is

the significant specie vaporizing. Assuming that there is little vaporization of

copper from the molten pool, copper enrichment observed is the result of loss of

aluminum. Based on the above assumption, the percentage loss of aluminum was

estimated to be in the range of 15 to 24%. Loss of aluminum due to vaporization 5

 WWI"

%0

113 ~
combined with the volume shrinkage of the molten pool on cooling can cause the I

shrinkage cavities observed in the laser welds in alloy 2219.

Table 5.2 compares the percentage loss of aluminum with the volume of

porosity determined by the density measurements for a few selected welds and

shows a direct relation between these two effects. Although welds 102 and 107 have P rP

been made at different welding conditions, they still result in the same amount

of heat input per unit length of the the weld. However, they show considerable

difference in the percentage loss of aluminum as well as in the volume of porosity

present. The higher peak temperatures in the welds associated with the higher

input power intensity involved in weld 102 has resulted in the larger amount of

aluminum vaporization as compared to the weld 107. Similarly, weld 103 made at

10 kw and a higher welding speed of 40 ipm has resulted in a smaller amount of

aluminum vaporization and also smaller levels of porosity observed as compared

to weld 102 made at 10 kw and a lower welding speed of 30 ipm. The higher

welding speed results in lower power input per unit length of weld, with generally

lower temperatures in the weld pool.

S

Table 5.2. Loss of aluminum related to porosity in alloy 2219.

# 102 #103 # 107

% loss of aluminum 24.12 17.48 15.07

Vol. of pores (cc x 100) 3.41 3.09 2.63

5.4.2 Alloys 5xxx

In the 5xxx series aluminum alloys, the most significant change in the weld ,

metal composition was observed in aluminum and magnesium which were both

40

-~~~~" 'VI ,.~ .- - -%t7r..

 114 JO
depleted and manganese which was enriched as compared to the base metal. Table

5.3 and 5.4 summarize the results of compositional changes in a few on-focus

keyhole welds in alloys 5083 and 5456 respectively. Again, using similar arguments
as in section 5.4.1 and from figures 3.2a and 3.3a, it is seen that manganese has

significantly lower vapor pressure as compared to aluminum and magnesium in

the melting point to boiling point range and beyond. It is therefore reasonable

to assume that manganese vaporization is negligible and the enrichment in this

element is solely caused by the loss in aluminum and magnesium. Based on this

assumption, the loss in aluminum was estimated to be from 7 to 19% in alloy 5083,

and up to 22% in alloy 5456. Similarly, the loss in magnesium was found to be

from 18 to 26% in alloy 5083 and up to 25% in alloy 5456.

Table 5.3. Weld metal Composition in alloy 5083.

Weld Al Mg Mn

Base Metal 94.44 4.36 0.62

10 kw, 20 ipm 94.94 3.21 0.66

(# 202)
10 kw, 30 ipm 94.24 3.62 0.72
(# 201)
10 kw, 40 ipm 92.18 4.11 0.76
(#203) ._
7.5 kw, 10 ipm 94.74 3.64 0.66
(# 204)
7.5 kw, 20 ipm 91.13 4.38 0.82
(#205)
5 kw, 10 ipm
(# 206)
5 kw, 15 ipm
95.34

93.23
4.29

4.26
1 0.77

0.66
.., .

(# 204) "__

%
i
 115

Table 5.4. Weld metal Composition in alloy 5456.

Weld Al Mg Mn

Base metal 93.98 4.51 0.55

10 kw, 30 ipm 93.26 4.74 0.70

(# 302)
10 kw, 40 ipm 93.45 3.99 0.65
(#301)
0

Table 5.5 and 5.6 compare the percentage loss of aluminum and magnesium

as well as the volume of porosity observed among the different welds in alloys

5083 and 5456 respectively. Several inconsistencies are evident among these alloys

as well as within each alloy. For instance, comparing welds 201 and 203 with

increasing welding speeds for the same input power of 10 kw, percentage loss in

aluminum increased from 12.49 to 19.19, but the percentage loss in magnesium
decreased from 26.62 to 22.25, and so did the porosity volume. However, between

welds 201 and 207 with equal power input per unit lengths but different welding

conditions, both the percentage loss in aluminum and magnesium decreased, but 0

the porosity volume increased. Further, comparing the welds 201 and 203 in alloy

5083 with the welds 302 and 301 in alloy 5456, although the trend in porosity A.

volume is similar, the trends in percentage loss of aluminum and magnesium are

reversed.

It is clear that the higher magnesium content in the 5xxx series alloys results

in much larger amounts of porosity in the weld as compared to the magnesium free

alloy 2219. But, the porosity volume could not be correlated to the percentage loss

of aluminum or magnesium and thereby the welding parameters in any consistent

manner, as was possible with alloy 2219. WR

" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..-.. .1 .
 ._J 116

Table 5.5. Loss of aluminum and magnesium related to porosity in alloy 5083.

#201 #203 # 207

% loss of aluminum 12.49 19.19 7.26

% loss of magnesium 26.62 22.25 18.81

Vol. of pores (cc x 100) 13.21 11.30 16.63

Table 5.6. Loss of aluminum and magnesium related to porosity in alloy 5456.

#302 # 301 # 307

% loss of aluminum 22.03 15.87 -

% loss of magnesium 17.52 25.06 -

Vol. of pores (cc x 100) 18.18 9.43 19.24 N

5.4.3 Summary _

Porosity and shrinkage cavities were observed only in the higher intensity

keyhole mode welds, with the associated significant vaporization of aluminum as

well as other volatile alloying elements. A direct corelation was observed between

the loss of aluminum and the volume of porosity measured in alloy 2219. This alloy

exhibited large shrinkage cavities in the middle of the weld and very little amount N

of spherical gas porosity of the kind observed in the 5xxx alloy. The 5xxx alloys ",N

showed a large amount of spherical porosity with large pores accumulated near the

top surface of the welds. The large bubble formation is attributed to the boiling

of highly volatile magnesium present in the 5xxx alloys. It is conceivable that

-p
 m
117

considerable amount of the bubbles escaped from the molten metal, but sufficient
S
quantity of bubbles were trapped in the weld resulting in the large volume of
spherical porosity observed in these alloys in addition to the large cavities in
the middle of the welds. The aluminum alloys have a large solidification range,
which results in a large mushy zone during solidification as seen in figure 5.35 and
5.36 which are discussed later. As solidification progresses, the large mushy zone
prevents the bubbles to float up and escape, resulting in the entrapment of the
large amount of spherical pores.

5.5 Microstructures in Aluminum Laser Welds

The weld metal properties are dependent upon the microstructures and
segregation patterns in the weld zone, and are a function of the welding process
variables, the weld geometry, and the material thermal properties. The welding
process also effects the properties of the base metal surrounding the weld zone
called the heat affected zone (HAZ). In the non-heat treatable aluminum alloys in
the series lxxx, 3xxx, 4xxx and 5xxx, the strengthening mechanism employed is
cold working. Thus, for these alloys, the welding cycle effects the HAZ by annealing
it to varying degrees of strength reduction. However, in the heat-treatable
aluminum alloys belonging to the series 2xxx, 4xxx, 6xxx and 7xxx, the principal
S
strengthening mechanism is the controlled precipitation of the supersaturated R%

solutes in the alloy. This is achieved by solution heat treatment and quenching

to dissolve the solute into the matrix, followed by an aging process to induce.,.- .

the precipitation. Welding of the precipitation strengthened aluminum alloys

therefore results in a variety of structures in the HAZ ranging from the fusion
zone, solid solution zone, overaged zone to unaffected base metal. In the following
paragraphs, typical structures observed in transverse sections of a few selected
welds are described.
da

9
....
 118

5.5.1 Alloy 2219 ".

Base metal microstructure of alloy 2219 in the annealed condition is shown in

figure 5.12. The microstructure consists of elongated grains in the rolling direction

of the solid solution with small particles of CuA12 (light) widely distributed,

along with larger and darker particles of (Fe,Mn)3SiAl12 . The strengthening

heat-treatment would have resulted in much larger quantity of precipitates of the

intermetallic phase CuA12 agglomerating into larger globules.

0

The weld zone for a 10 kw, 20 ipm on-focus weld is shown in figures 5.13

to 5.16. The weld microstructure consists of a aluminum phase in a dendritic

network of the E phase (CuA12 ). However, the substructure varies widely from

the edge of the fusion zone to the center of the weld. In figure 5.13, the edge of

the fusion zone is shown with the unmelted region in the bottom right side of the

figure. The weld zone consists of a small region of cellular grains changing rapidly

to columnar dendritic structure within a few microns. Figure 5.14 of a region

further interior and away from the weld boundary shows the columnar dendritic

structure in more detail and clarity. Finally, figure 5.15 shows equiaxed grains

from the interior of the weld far from the weld boundary. The primary dendrite

arm spacing in this equiaxed region is finer than in the outer edges of the weld, %

indicating smaller thermal gradients at the late stages of solidification. However,

the dendrite arm spacing does vary considerably within this equiaxed region. It

is to be noted that for a reliable measurement of the dendrite arm spacing, the

sections must be parallel to the growth direction - this is easily accomplished in S

the outer regions of the welds where columnar dendrites are observed with growth

direction clearly defined. However, in the interior of the weld with the equiaxed

grains randomly oriented, average values of dendrite arm spacing were taken from

many grains.

0v
 luxu

119i
.

+ - -... -l.

,. . .... g

- is=4j

jS..
S * - 7 . .-.

V . . ..

,. .,._ -. ,, =,..
Figure 5.12
-
.,
Bose metal
- --. . ...
2219 (x 100).
in alloy "" - ' V:,

F ."

w
'%
..

Alp %~ % P

2* %
 120

I.IA\
~~
-'

-4,

A-

columnar ~ i i ~ st u t .ed
r (x 2 0)

.%.% %

Figure 5.14 Weld metal ina the fusdleo boundary; eua

colun r e ndi200 stucur 200)

Uv p rS
A A A -
 - - - - . *~ 4 t-%. A

121

16 Fsio shwin
zoe 5bonday
Figue ep taxil gowt

rn eal lqa inad g lm rto

frmp

of
HA 00)
(xpase n

I -.

_k .... 4
 122

In the HAZ close to the fusion boundary, there is evidence of incipient melting

as well as agglomeration of the 0 phase as seen in figure 5.16. As this alloy was

originally in the annealed condition, other structures like the overaged zone are

not present.

From figure 5.9a showing the macro-section of the weld, the weld appears to

be a superimposition of two welds - 1. a wide and shallow weld made on top of

2. a narrower deep penetration weld. Also, several bands of columnar dendritic I S

regions interspersed with equiaxed grains are evident. Such banding was unique

to this alloy and was observed in both the on-focus as well as off-focus welds.

5.5.2 Alloys 5xxx

As the composi.,ons of the aluminum alloys 5083 and 5456 vary only

marginally, the weld microstructures observed were quite similar. Thus, only

the microstructures in a keyhole laser weld in alloy 5083 are presented here as .

representative samples of both the alloys. Figure 5.17 shows the base metal

structure of the annealed alloy showing light outlined particles of irregular shaped

intermetallic compound (Fe,Mn)AI6. Also, some dark particles of the insoluble

Mg 2 Si are seen. Rapid cooling has resulted in the retention of the Mg 2 AI3 phase

in the solid solution. Elongated grains in the rolling direction are evident.
-7

The weld microstructures are shown in figures 5.18 and 5.19. In figure 5.18,

the unmelted region is on the bottom right end of the picture. The weld structure

consists of Mg 2 AI 3 at the dendrite boundaries in a matrix of the solid solution.

Not much variation in the dendrite arm spacing is seen from the edge of the weld

to the center. In this non-heat treatable aluminum alloy, the structures in the

HAZ are virtually unchanged. '

p W
 ~
MmW
MAXIM~~~~~~~~~~~M ~IrU~ ~~W~ k;P. MWBU 7
rX I PO
AM XC V rqUprAIW vATA- N r,, ,"

123

-t,

S S

'5{

Figure 5.17 Bse metal in al ly 5083 (x 200).

*0

. h
rig. 200) .% R
NO

. ,

55,..,
-...

.- . .- - . - _

" ""S ',S..

" - ,'' "- 55. -

Fusion zone boundary with bse metal on the .. '

Figure 518
,,
right (x 200).

o
 0
124

", .,,1, , , "-

%
'.L"

'.
* . .

-.
% S

* - -'.2.

Figure 5.19 Weld metal in the middle of the weld (x 200). ; h't

4N

44.
*Sm~.4~w ~ S~*S(~N S S' - ' 5 *N *. , ..

L L
*~~~~-
L..% L%L '.
 125

5.5.3 Alloy 6061

The parent metal microstructure in the 1.27 cm thick plate in alloy 6061.T6

is shown in figure 5.20. The structure is made up of elongated grains of aluminum

solid solution with fine gray particles of the intermetallic (Fe,Mn,Cr) 3 SiAli 2 along

with dark particles of Mg 2 Si precipitate distributed throughout the matrix. In the

4 mm thick plate of the same alloy used for the conduction mode welds, similar

structures were observed with more precipitation of Mg 2 Si in the matrix.

The HAZ microstructures in the thick plate 10 kw, 40 ipm on-focus laser weld

are shown in figures 5.21 and 5.22 representing the overaged region and the fusion

boundary respectively. In the overaged region, the Mg 2 Si particles have grown

due to further precipitation from the solid solution. In figure 5.22, liquation of

the Al-Mg 2 Si eutectic is evident around the ground boundaries. Also, some dark

regions of the eutectic agglomeration can be seen.

The weld structures for the same weld are shown in figures 5.23 and 5.24.

The structure consists of an interdendritic network of the Al-Si eutectic in the

aluminum solid solution matrix. The unmelted region is on the bottom right side

of the figure 5.23, and the columnar dendritic structure is clearly evident in the

weld zone. The equiaxed dendritic nature of the structure in the middle of the

weld is shown in figure 5.24. Again, the primary dendrite arm spacing progressively

decreases from the edge of the weld to the weld center.

For the conduction mode welds in the 4 mm thick plates, the structures were .

slightly different. For the 10 kw, 20 ipm conduction mode weld, figure 5.25 and

5.26 show the same region of the fusion boundary at the bottom of the weld at

different magnifications. More extensive iquation of the eutectic is seen in the 0

HAZ. Also agglomeration of the eutectic into large globules is seen in this region.

" V * J . * *z* *** ~ ~ * ~ ~ ~ Id~d% q

 126

-lab. ~ -

49S

Figre
.20Bas meal n alo 6-T (x00

A4",

Figure 5.20 BaZsheoin inaloy region (x 500).

 127

for

ON

Iftw

-%.A

... ....

Figure 5.22 Fusion zone showing columaio dendrie

agoatihn
ofuet tic wl theison
right (x 500).
 128

-A4

... '4, -A

;s4.
Fiue52 Euae enrtcsrutr nth ideo

wel (x 50)
 IV

S (4

V- W ,

Figure 5.25 Fusion zone boundary in 0.4 cm thick 6061-T6;

large amount of liquotion and agglomeration of
eutectic in HAZ in lower half; columnar
dendrites in weld in top half (x 200).

.. ..-.
"" "- - " V..,--
iI

tt0

Figure 5.26 Fusion zone at higher magnificaion (x 500).

C-N
 Io

130

Keller's reagent used for the etching has dissolved the Mg 2 Si and has resulted in r

the agglomeration seen as a void. The weld structures are shown in the figures 5.27

and 5.28. The columnar dendritic structure close to the edge of the weld changes

to more equiaxed dendritic as seen in these figures. Compared to the welds in the

1.27 cm thick plates, the primary dendrite arm spacing is much larger. Also, the

amount of the interdendritic eutectic present is higher in the thinner plate welds.

5.6 Thermal Modeling of Aluminum Laser Welds

The finite element program THERM described in chapter 4 was used to model

the laser welds in aluminum alloys. The temperature dependent thermal properties

used for the modeling are shown in table 5.7 for each of the four alloys.1,1B2 As the

chemical composition varies only marginally between the alloys 5083 and 5456, and

the experimental results for the weld bead dimensions are also very similar, these

two alloys were not differentiated for the modeling. Alloy 2219 has slightly higher

thermal conductivity as well as volumetric specific heat as compared to the other

three alloys. Also, it has the largest solidification range of 100 "K, as compared to

64 'K for the 5xxx alloys and 70 *K for alloy 6061. The temperature dependent

specific heat data was available only for alloy 2219, and it was therefore assumed

constant for the other three alloys. The finite element mesh of 136 elements and

170 nodes consisting of 4 and 5 node elements is shown in figure 5.29.

For modeling the aluminum laser welds, the surface heat flux model was used

for the low penetration conduction mode welds, and the internal heat source model

was used for the deep penetration keyhole welds. A gaussian distribution of energy

was assumed in the laser bcam for modeling these welds. The effective beam spot

radius ro for the on-focus and off-focus welds was determined from spot burns on

thick acrylic slabs. The beam spot diameters for the on-focus and off-focus welds

.. ..
* 4~~
. V.V
w %~.
--
 131

- .,.,- - " ' P_ ' -

,.-- "

. _.: .
- r. -... . a *
, - -. .._ s - - u . .. .

C V
,- - ', m. .
.-,.

. - - " JJ
. -- 4/. -

, .
- -, - ..,d'jqV - --.- 'm' ,
-'a-- 2

x 500) .

. , .- -t, -. . .. m

.- -. - *t

-
, .
J}* 4 o v.
4/ .-

IleD o un da ry
L a r e r e n di d
te s t r u c t u r e in e a r e w e l d lb
F ig u r e 5 .2 7

P.~

Fig re .28 Fin r eu ia e t u t r n t e m d l f w l

(x'b. 500)...
 132

- -1co

C, co r-C.C'

') -UL.

(0

- 0

C c 0

C.Z

a. ____ __ _ _ _ _ _ _
 133

C)E j~
o U7
* ~ , '-

Li% O
<o

(II

z El

00

0.

3c V

- C. V)

L) J

Q)C'4 .

0
S'

.%

-d~~~~~ r4 L..XN -I.-'

 JF-,X7
J9, ,J-,* V-

134

were estimated to be 0.08 and 0.12 cm respectively. The effective depth yo of the

internal heat source was assumed to be 1.27 cm or the plate thickness. For alloy -

2219, this value resulted in overprediction of the weld penetration, and therefore,

a value of 1.0 cm was used for this alloy.

5.6.1 Absorptivity

To accurately model the laser welds, an effective absorption coefficient must be

assumed to ensure that only the laser energy actually absorbed by the material is

used in the heat transfer analysis for each of the welds. The overall welding process

efficiency (77)presented in section 5.1.5 was used to estimate the absorptivity

values tu be used for the modeling. As Banas 2 ' has discussed, the overall process
efficiency 77 is defined as S
7
77 = 7a.?7m.
a

Here, r7a is the absorptivity which depends on the material and surface charac-

teristics as discussed in section 2.3, and 7m is the melting efficiency defined as

the ratio of the energy required to melt the material within the weld zone to the

absorbed laser power. Both the melting efficiency and the absorptivity depend on

the welding mode. At low intensity conduction mode welds, the melting efficiency

is lower than at high intensity levels, as more of the heat is conducted away faster

into the material. Also, the absorptivity changes dramatically with the keyhole

formation as discussed in section 2.3. These two factors result in the overall

process efficiency changing with the welding parameters as seen in figure 5.5. The

absorptivity values used in the calculation of the heat input term as per section %
4.3 were estimated based on the above process efficiency data; absorptivity values

averaging 1.5 times the process efficiency generally gave the best results in the

predictions of the weld bead geometry.

' ! : t
....-....
""J
b k~"] LI" i, I " '11 I .. . : I" - : : ...- Ai
 135 4

5.6.2 Prediction of Weld Geometry I.

S

Laser welds in aluminum alloys were analysed using the finite element program 4.

THERM, and the predicted weld geometries compared with the experiment-l4
results. The solidus isotherm was defined as the boundary of the weld zone.

Accurate prediction of the cross-section of the weld is widely used as an important :

test for any weld heat transfer model. As discussed in chapter 4, in the cross- ,

sectional approach for modeling partial to full penetration welds ill thick plates,

the thermal history in the reference plane is predicted at successive time steps as

the heat source moves towards and passes the reference plane. A three dimensional '-

picture of the weld pool can thus be assembled as is shown in the figure 5.30 for a

10 kw, 1.27 cm/sec (30 ipm) on-focus weld in alloy 2219. For clarity, the top view

and the longitudinal section of the same weld pool are shown in figures 5.31 and a-

5.32 respectively. It is seen from figure 5.32 that the maximum weld penetration

in the weld occurs slightly after the heat source has passed the reference plane (0.

in the x-axis). But, the maximum top bead width is seen in figure 5.31 to occur

a considerable distance behind the peak penetration plane. The predicted weld
cross-sections are obtained by the projection of the three dimensional weld pool

on to the reference plane.

Table 5.8 shows the selected aluminum laser welds modeled covering a wide S

range of welding parameters. Also shown in the table are the absorptivity values

used for modeling these laser welds; these values were derived from the process

efficiency data discussed earlier. The type of heat source assumed (surface heat ,._

flux or internal heat source) for each of the welds is also indicated. Figures 5.33

to 5.40 show the weld cross-sections of these welds in the alloys 2219, 5xxx and

6061. The predicted weld profiles match reasonably well with the experimental ]

results. The weld penetration, top bead width as well as the weld cross-sectional %
 136

CccN

N4N

-S 0

N_ E 0

u C)

a)

C)

.k%
 137*

000
Li-
Lo%

..
...... 37

0S
0 .6LI

I, %

~%
~ lop
I0,

qlp~m ,.a

VC"W
0 2- L
 138
's

NN

UJ-I

L~4i)

~ .~* -

0S
0
c

040

Ci

-% ,

LO C)
LA
(ww)U014J40ud
 C

(NN
N

coC

0 I0

=1 14

b4ILo

00 00

ol

uojojaa. -wj
 140

CNC

E J--

'hi

0~%

1 . C1 0(

(LULU
qua UO 'Dj
 141

uK

0 0

IE

coo

S 0
Eu

-- C-
(.w CoI~lqe

0%
 142

040

VV
EE
Z0
U.U,

(0

CC)

17 ~z 0 ) .
I CN to co r4

i0
(ww)uoilj~aud LL
 143

CN
u
Q)

cc E

PI

ZliQ C)

x
x

- 0

-o C1 0L

Uuw 'all~oadL

%1
 144

mS

UJ UU
0 4

LOl

Sx

CD u

co
(fl

Q)%
3b
cc cv I.

ad Vww -a 5'j
 V I .,
ILIdo

145

CN

CU)

cU

z m Q

UJ LLJ-

'C
S

C)

(N (Dc

(ujw)uollojqu-v
V%

%01 ld S
 I
146

EE
I I.

- Q)

00

00

coo
Di C)UW I. J'

N, .1 .
 147

area are in good agreement with the experimental data. However, the model does

not accurately predict the nail-head shape of deep penetration welds. S

Table 5.8. Absorptivity values used in modeling aluminum laser welds.

Welds Alloy 2219 Alloy 5xxx Alloy 6061

5 kw, 0.635 cm/sec 0.06t 0.25t -

(on-focus)

10 kw, 1.27 cm/sec 0.35t 0.35t 0.20t

(on-focus)

5 kw, 0.423 cm/sec 0.06t

(off-focus)

10 kw, 0.423 cm/sec 0.125t 0.15t -

(off-focus)

t: Surface heat flux model.

Internal heat source model

5.6.3 Prediction of Local Solidification Times

The finite element program THERM predicts the temperatures at all the

nodes for successive time steps, and from these temperature histories, the thermal,% , ,.

gradients and the local cooling rates are determined. The model was used

to predict the local solidification times in keyhole laser welds in aluminum

alloys. Local solidification times and thereby the solidification rates significantly

influence the weld metal microstructure and the solidification morphology. The

dendrite arm spacings are an important characteristic of the weld metal and

effect its mechanical properties - in general, the finer the spacings , the better

the strength and toughness. The primary dendrite arm spacing is inversely

proportional to square root of the thermal gradient, whereas the secondary arm

spacings are directly proportional to the local solidification times.3 3 Considerable

%
_ A
 148,

experimental data exists for the aluminum - 4.5% copper system which shows

that the secondary dendrite arm spacing and the local solidification time follow S

the empirical relation 4 ele

d =7.50039 (5.1)

where d is the secondary dendrite arm spacing in microns, and 0 the local

solidification time in seconds.

Table 5.9. Solidification time in on-focus laser weld in alloy 2219.

(10 kw, 0.847 cm/sec)

Node X Y Sol. Time Predicted Measured 0

mm mm sec. Spacing, A Spacing, A

12 0. 0 5.8 0.4053 5.27 6.56

112 3.3 4.3 0.3603 5.03 6.35 S

123 5.8 3.5 0.3159 4.77 5.98

Table 5.9 shows the experimentally determined arm spacing at three locations
in a 10 kw, 0.847 cm/sec on-focus laser weld in alloy 2219. Also shown are

the calculated secondary dendrite arm spacings using equation 5.1 and the

solidification times predicted by THERM. The predicted arm spacings are in good

agreement with the experimentally measured values.

6%

I -d

%
 149

Chapter 6

CONCLUSIONS

The main objective of the investigation was to understand the influence of

I
laser welding parameters on the weld characteristics in aluminum alloys 2219,

5083, 5456 and 6061. The investigation consisted of an experimental program to

analyze the high power laser welds in aluminum alloys, and an analytical program
for the thermal modeling of the melting and solidification phenomena in laser

welds. The main conclusions of the investigation are as follows:

i. Weld penetration varied considerably among the four aluminum alloys inves- 0

tigated. Alloy 2219 showed the smallest weld penetration and the 5xxx series

alloys the largest for similar welding condition. Presence of volatile alloying

elements like magnesium in the 5xxx alloys alloys results in a higher vapor _1

pressure, and consequently in deeper vapor columns or keyholes. In addition,

the laser welds in aluminum alloys exhibited large bead widths owing to the

high thermal diffusivity as well as the lower enthalpy per unit volume. The

overall process efficiency determined from the weld cross-sectional areas also

showed a wide variation among the alloys investigated. The highest process

efficiency of over 33% was observed in 10 kw laser welds in alloy 5456. However,

the process efficiency for alloy 2219 was only about 24% for similar welding

conditions. Conduction mode welds had efficiency values under 5%. The .. ,

overall process efficiency calculated from the experimentally determined weld

areas is directly related to the amount of laser energy absorbed by the material
%. r

during the welding cycle. .

ii. The 5xxx series alloys showed a cyclic variation in the weld penetration along S

the weld travel direction. Up to 15% variation in penetration was observed

. . S5* *, -- % *
--. S.-...- -. - . . .- - .. ,C% .-
 150

with a frequency of about 4 to 6 hz evidently caused by an unstable and

oscillating keyhole. Violent eruptions occurred during the welding cycle due 1

to the frequent collapse of the keyhole and the weld surface often exhibited

open cavities. %

iii. The laser welds in aluminum alloys were characterized for the nature and

amount of porosity present in the welds in terms of the welding parameters and

alloying content. Conduction mode welds were generally free from porosity or

shrinkage cavities. The volume of porosity was the highest for the 5xxx alloys,
and generally decreased with increasing welding speed. In the keyhole welds,

the magnesium containing alloys 5xxx exhibited a large amount of spherical

porosity of up to 0.4 cm diameter. The, larger spherical pores were usually

clustered near the top of the welds. Further, laser welds ion these alloys

also contained large cavities in the weld. These cavities are caused by the
entrapment of parts of the unstable cavity as it oscillates between maximum

depth and collapse. Alloys 2219 and 6061 did not exhibit any spherical

pores, but did contain occasional large shrinkage cavities. No secondary

interdendritic porosity was found in any of the welds.

iv. Loss of elements from the keyhole laser welds were determined by the electron

microprobe analyzer. Aluminum was the main specie vaporized during laser

welding of alloy 2219. Percentage loss of aluminum from the weld was related

to the amount of porosity or shrinkage cavities present in the welds. In alloys

5xxx, both aluminum and magnesium were the dominant vaporizing species.

However, no direct correlation between % loss of aluminum or magnesium

and the amount of porosity measured could be established. The large amount

of spherical porosity observed in these alloys is associated with the boiling S

of magnesium from the weld metal, and the subsequent entrapment of the

0k
V*.i4* .d'~ r2%

V, % %-~~
 bubbles. The large solidification range in the aluminum alloys results in a
Or
large mushy zone during solidification, increasing the probability of bubble

entrapment.

v. A two-dimensional nonlinear finite element model was developed to analyze the

transient heat flow in welding. The model was tested for stability and accuracy -A.-
by solving numerous heat-conduction problems involving phase change. The -

results predicted by the numerical model THERM were in good agreement

with the relevant published experimental and/or analytical results.

vi. The heat transfer model was used to simulate the melting and solidification

phenomenon occurring in keyhole laser welds. The weld bead shape and di-

mensions predicted by the model are in good agreement with the experimental

results. The model was used to predict the three-dimensional shape of the

weld pool, and the shape of the large mushy zone that results during the

solidification of laser welds in aluminum alloys.

vii. The model was also used to predict the local solidification rates and times V",

in the weld. The solidification times at specific locations in the weld

zone were correlated with the secondary dendrite arm spacings in the weld

microstructure. The predicted dendrite arm spacings were in good agreement

with the experimentally measured values..-

, % . ..

%.R I

J.
 -IF _V
-v K-. -i

152

REFERENCES

1. Hanson, R.C. 1985. A Comparison of High Energy Beam Systems - Electron

Beam/Laser Beam. Proc. of conf. on The Laser vs. the Electron Beam in
Welding, Cutting and Surface Treatment, pp. 255, Bakish Materials Corporation,
Englewood, NJ.

2. Quigley, M.B.C. 1986. High Power Density Welding. The Physics of

Welding, 2nd ed., pp. 306-329, IIW, Pergamon Press, NY.

3. Breinan, E.M., Banas, C.M., and Greenfield, M.A. 1981. Laser Welding
- The Present State-of-the-Art. Source Book of Electron Beam & Laser Welding,
pp. 247, ASM, Metals Park, OH. 6

4. Ready, J.F. 1978. Industrial Applications of Lasers. Academic Press, NY.

5. Duley, W.W. 1976. C0 2 Lasers, Effects 8 Applications, Academic Press,

NY.

6. Duley, W.W. 1983. Laser Processing 8 Analysis of Materials, Plenum

Press, NY.

7. Devletian, J.H., and Wood, W.E. 1983. Factors Affecting Porosity in

Aluminum Welds - A Review, WRC Bulletin 290, Welding Research Council, NY.

8. American Welding Society. 1982. Metals and their Weldability., Welding

Handbook, vol. 4, 7th ed., AWS.

9. Snow, D.B., and Breinan, E.M. 1978. Evaluation of Basic Laser Welding
Capabilities. United Tech. Research Center Report R78-911989-14.

10. Snow, D.B., Kaufman, M.J., Banas, C.M., and Breinan, E.M. 1979. -
Evaluation of Basic Laser Welding Capabilities. United Tech. Research Center
Report R79-911989-17.

11. Moon, D.W., and Metzbower, E.A. 1983. Laser Beam Welding of
Aluminum Alloy 5456. Welding Journal,62(2):53-s to 58-s.

12. Oreper, G.M. and Szekely, J. 1984. Heat- and Fluid-flow Phenomena in
Weld Pools. J. Fluid. Mech, 147:53-79.

13. Marcus, S., Lowder, J.E., and Mooney, D.L. 1976. Large Spot Thermal
Coupling of CO 2 Laser Radiation to Metallic Surfaces. J. Appl. Phys., 47(7):2966-
2968.

JS W
 153
14. Pavelic, V., Tanbakuchi, R., Uyehara, O.A., and Myers, P.S. 1969. **1

Experimental and Computed Temperature Histories in Gas Tungsten-Arc Welding

of Thin Plates. Welding Journal, 48(7):295-s to 305-s.

15. Tong, H., and Giedt, W.H. 1971. Depth of Penetration during Electron
Beam Welding. J. Heat Transfer, 93(5):155-163.

16. Miyazaki, T., and Giedt, W.H. 1982. Heat Transfer from an Elliptical
Cylinder Moving Through an Infinite Plate Applied to Electron Beam Welding.
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 25(6):807-814.

17. Mazumder, J., and Steen, W.M. 1980. Heat Transfer Model for CW Laser
Material Processing. J. Appi. Phys., 51(2):941-947.

18. Chande, T., and Mazumder, J. 1984. Estimating Effects of Processing

Conditions and Variable Properties upon Pool Shape, Cooling Rates, and
Absorption Coefficient in Laser Welding. J. Appl. Phys., 56(7):1981-1986.

19. Goldak, J., Chakravarti, A., and Bibby, M. 1984. A New Finite Element
Model for Welding Heat Sources. Metall. Trans. B, 15B(6):299-305. 0

20. Goldak, J., Bibby, M., Moore, J., House, R., and Patel, B. 1986. Computer
Modeling of Heat Flow in Welds. Metall. Trans. B, 17B(9):587-600.

21. Ready, J.F. 1982. Material Processing - An Overview. Proc. of the IEEE, 0
70(6):533-544. i_

22. Huntington, C.A., and Eager, T.W. 1983. Laser Welding of Aluminum
and Aluminum Alloys. Welding Journal, 62(4):105-s to 107-s.

23. Jergensen, M. 1980. Increasing Energy Absorption in Laser Welding. 0

Metal Construction, (2):88.

24. McLachlan, A.D. 1986. Improved Coupling Coefficient of Laser Radiation

to Aluminum by means of Absorptive Polymer Coatings. J. Appl. Phys.,
59(6):1829-1833.

25. Banas, C.M., and Webb, R. 1982. Macro-Materials Processing. Proc. of 4.

the IEEE, 70(6):556-565. .-

26. Lewis, G.K., and Dixon, R.D. 1985. Plasma Monitoring of Laser Beam
Welds, Welding Journal, 64(2):49-s to 54-s.

27. Dixon, R.D., and Lewis, G.K. 1985. Electron Emission and Plasma "'na 4
Formation during Laser Beam Welding. Welding Journal, 64(3):71-s to 78-s.

28. Martukanitz, R.P. 1982. Sources of Porosity in Gas Metal Arc Welding of
Aluminum. Trends in Welding Research, pp.315-330, ASM.
 154

29. Andrew, R.C., and Chadwick, G.A. 1975. Source of Hydrogen Porosity
in Aluminum Alloy Welds - A Literature Survey - AWRA Report P3-5-74.
X,
Australian Welding Research, pp. 1-19.
30. Talbot, D.E.J. 1975. Effects of Hydrogen in Aluminum. Magnesium,
Copper, and Their Alloys. Int. Metall. Reviews, Review 201, 20:166-184.

31. Hatch, J.E. 1984. Aluminum, Properties and Physical Metallurgy, ASM.

32. Howden, D.G., and Milner, D.R. 1963. Hydrogen Absorption in Arc
Welding. Brit. Weld. J., 10(6):304-316.

33. Campbell, J. 1968. Pore Nucleation in Solidifying Metals. The

Solidification of Metals, ISI Pub. # 110, pp. 18-26.

34. Grigorenko, G.M. 1970. Formation of Pores in Welds. Avt. Svarka.,

10:13-17.

35. Howden, D.G. 1971. An Up-to-Date Look at Porosity Formation in

Aluminum Weldments. Welding Journal,50(2):112-114. .0

36. Uda, M., and Ohno, S. 1974. Porosity Formation in Weld Metal - I.
Effect of Hydrogen on Porosity Formation in Pure Aluminum At Non-Arc Melting.
Trans. National Res. Inst. for Metals, 16(2):29-36.

37. Nikiforov, G.D., Trusov, S.A., and Silant'eva, S.A. 1980. The Redistribu- 0
tion of Hydrogen during the Solidification of Aluminum. Svar. Proiz., 9:44-48.

38. D'Anessa, A.T. 1967. Microstructural Aspects of Weld Solidification.

Welding Journal,46(11):491s to 499s.

39. Opie, W.R., and Grant, N.J. 1950. Hydrogen Solubility in Aluminum and
some Aluminum Alloys. Trans. of AIME, J. of Metals, 188(10):1237-1241.

40. Woods, R.A. 1974. Porosity and Hydrogen Absorption in Aluminum

Welds. Welding Journal,53(3):97s to 108s.

41. Chalmers, B. 1964. Principles of Solidification. John Wiley & Sons, NY.

42. Kubo, K., and Pehlke, R.D. 1985. Mathematical Modeling of Porosity.*-"...:,
Formation in Solidification. Metall. Trans. B, 168(6):359-366.

43. American Society of Metals. 1983. Welding, Brazing, and Soldering. ,.

Metals Handbook, vol. 6, 9th ed., ASM.

44. Mazumder, J. 1982. Laser Welding: State of the Art Review. J. Met.,
34(7):16-24.
 155

45. Block-Bolten, A., and Eager, T.W. 1982. Selective Evaporation of Metals
from Weld Pools. Trends in Welding Research, , pp.53-73, ASM.
0
46. Khan, P.A.A., and DebRoy, T. 1984. Alloying Element Vaorization and
Weld Pool Temperature during Laser Welding of AISI 202 Stainless Steel. Metall.
Trans. B, 15B(12):641-644.

47. Schauer, D.A., Giedt, W.H., and Shintaku, S.M. 1978. Electron Beam
Welding Cavity Temperature Distributions in Pure Metals and Alloys. Welding
Journal, 57(5):127-s to 133-s..60111

48. Flemings, M.C. 1974. Solidification Processing. McGraw-Hill, New York. -

49. Rosenthal, D. 1941. Mathematical Theory of Heat Distribution during

Welding and Cutting. Welding Journal,20(5):220-s to 234-s.

50. Myers, P.S., Uyehara, O.A., and Borman, G.L. 1967. Fundamentals of
Heat Flow in Welding. WRC Bulletin 123, Welding Research Council, NY.

51. Christensen, N.,Davies, V. de L., and Gjermundsen, K. 1965. Distribution

of Temperatures in Arc Welding. Brit. Weld. J., 12(2):54-75.

52. Malmuth, N.D. 1976. Temperature Field of a Moving Point Source with
Change of State. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 19(4):349-354.

53. Trivedi, R., and Srinivasan, S.R. 1974. Temperature Distribution Around
a Moving Cylindrical Source. J. Heat Transfer, 96(8):427-428.

54. Swift-Hook, D.T., and Gick, E.F. 1973. Penetration Welding with Lasers.
Welding Journal, 52(11):492-s to 499-s.

55. Gray, W.H., Schnurr, N.M. 1975. A Comparison of the Finite Element
and Finite Difference Methods for the Analysis of Steady Two Dimensional Heat 0
Conduction Problems. Comp. Methods in Appl. M[ech. and Engn., 6:243-245.

56. Fujii, H. 1973. Some Remarks on Finite Element Analysis of Time-

Dependent Field Problems. Theory and Practice in Finite Element Structural /
Analysis, Proc. of 1973 Tokyo Seminar on FE Analysis. Univ. of Tokyo Press. ,".'.

57. Zienkiewicz, O.C., and Parekh, C.J. 1970. Transient Field Problems: Two- "-
" "' "
Dimensional Analysis by Isoparametric Finite Elements. Int. J. of Num. Methods
in EngN., 2:61-71. 0
58. Hsiao, J.S. 1985. An Efficient Algorithm for Finite-Difference Analysis of

Heat Transfer with Melting and Solidification. Num. Heat Transfer, 8:653-666.

S
 156
59. Friedman, E. 1974. A Direct Iteration Method for the Incorporation of
Phase Change in Finite Element Heat Conduction Programs. AEC Research and
Development Report WAPD-TM-1133. S

60. Comini, G., Del Guidice, S., Lewis, R.W., and Zienkiewicz, O.C. 1974.
Finite Element Solution of Non-Linear Heat Conduction Problems with Special
Reference to Phase Change. Int. J. for Num. Methods in Engn., 8:613-624.

61. Pham, Q.T. 1987. A Note on Some Finite-Difference Methods for Heat
Conduction with Phase Change. Num. Heat Transfer, 11:353-359.

62. Myers, G.E. 1977. Numerically Induced Oscillations and Stability

Characteristicsof Finite Element Solutions to Two-Dimensional Heat-Conduction
Transients. Engineering Experimentation Report No. 43, Univ. of Wisconsin.

63. Bathe, Klaus-Jiirgen. 1982. Finite Element Procedures in Engineering

Analysis. Prentice-Hall, NJ.

64. Wood, W.L., and Lewis, R.W. 1975. A Comparison of Time Marching
Schemes for the Transient Heat Conduction Equation. Int. J. for Num. Methods
in Engn., 9:679-689.

65. Donea, J. 1974. On the Accuracy of Finite Element Solutions to the

Transient Heat-Conduction Equation. Int. J. for Num. Methods in Engn., 8:103-
110.

66. Hultgren, R., Orr, R.L., Anderson, P.D., and Kelley, K.K. 1963. Selected
Values of Thermodynamic Properties of Metals and Alloys. John Wiley and Sons, r
NY.

67. Dushman, S., and Lafferty, J.M. 1962. Scientific Foundations of Vacuum
Technique. 2nd ed., John Wiley and Sons, NY.

68. Cobine, J.D., and Burger, E.E., 1955. Analysis of Electrode Phenomenon
in the High-Current Arc. J. Appl. Phys., 26(7):895-900.

69. Andersson, B. A. B. 1978. Thermal Stresses in a Submerged-Arc Welded

Joint Considering Phase Transformations. Trans. of ASME, J. of Engn. Matl.
and Tech., 100(10):356-362.

70. Friedman, E. 1975. Thermomechanical Analysis of the Welding Process

using the Finite Element Method. Trans. of ASME, J. of Pressure Vessel Tech., .. ,'%
(8) :206-213.

71. Rao, S.S. 1982. The Finite Element Method in Engineering. Pergamon
Press, NY.
 157
72. Wilson, E.L., Bathe, K.J., and Peterson, F.E. 1974. Finite Element
Analysis of Linear and Nonlinear Heat Transfer. Nuclear Engn. and Design,
29:110-124. 6

73. Bathe, Klaus-Jrirgen, and Khoshgoftaar, M.R. 1979. Finite Element

Formulation and Solution of Nonlinear Heat Transfer. Nuclear Engn. and Design,
51:389-401.

74. Weiner, J.H. 1955. Transient Heat Conduction in Multiphase Media. Brit.
J. Appl. Phys., 6(10):361-363.

75. Hibbitt, H.D., and Marcal, P.V. 1973. A Numerical, Thermo-Mechanical

Model for the Welding and Subsequent Loading of a Fabricated Structure. Comp.
and Structures, 3:1145-1174. 0

76. Lazardis, A. 1970. A Numerical Solution of the Multidimensional

Solidification (or Melting) Problem. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 13:1459-1477.

77. Friedman, E. Oct., 1987. Personal Communications.

78. Krutz, G.W., and Segerlind, L.J. 1978. Finite Element Analysis of Welded
Structures. Welding Journal,57(7):211s to 216s.

79. Chong, L.M. 1982. Predicting Weld Hardness. M. Eng. Thesis, Carleton
Univ, Ottawa, Canada.

80. Locke, E., Hoag, E., and Hella, R. 1972. Deep Penetration Welding with
High Power CO 2 Lasers. Welding Journal, 51(5):245-s to 249-s.

81. Touloukian, Y.S., and Ho, C.Y. 1973. Properties of Aluminum and
Aluminum Alloys. Thermomechanical Properties Research Center, Purdue Univ.,
IN.

82. American Society of Metals. 1979. Properties and Selection: Nonferrous

Alloys and Pure Metals. Metals Handbook, vol. 2, 9th ed., ASM.

83. Kurz, W., and Fisher, D.J. 1986. Fundamentals of Solidification. Trans
Tech Publications, Switzerland.

84. American Society of Metals. 1985. Metallography and Microstructures.

Metals Handbook, vol. 9, 9th ed., ASM. 0

.% *

V - J~'<~
~ V ~V ~ V ~ %.
 158

APPENDIX

INPUT AND OUTPUT DATA FILES

To solve a transient heat conduction problem using THERM, two separate

input data sets are required. The fi-st called INPUT consists of a description

of the overall problem and domain, the welding parameters including the terms

describing the spatial distribution of the energy, and the material thermal

properties. The second data set called MESH describes the finite element mesh S

used to discretise the domain being analysed. Following sections briefly describe

each of these data sets.

LNPUT

A sample INPUT file for a 10 kw, 1.27 cm/sec (30 ipm), on-focus laser weld

in alloy 2219 is shown below.

136 170 2000 10 0

5 2 1 1 0
2219.000 10000.000 1.270 0.000 0.350
1.270 1.000 0.040 -0.040 0.040
0.00050 0.00100 2.00000 300.00000 300.00000
816.000 9i6 . oo 015.750 0.150 4.000
451
273.000 1.170
323.000 1.280
816.000 1.840
916.000 1.963
300.000 2.426
366.000 2.576
589.000 2.908
816.000 3.515
916.000 3.783
300.000 0.000
0.000

Each line in the above example is described in the following paragraphs and .
I A
tables.
 159

Line 1 (Format 5110)

Item Name Description

1 NELEM # of elements
2 NNODE #of nodes

3 NTIMES # of time steps to be analysed

4 NPRINT Freq. at which output is reqd.

5 NCItECK 0: Actual run; 1 : Check input

Line 2 (Format 5110)

Item Name Descript ion

1 NITER Max # of iterations/timestep

2 NG # of gauss integration points

3 NMATL # of materials in the domain
4 NLUMP 0: Consistent C; 1 : Lumped C
5 NBATCH 0 Batch run; 1 Interactive run ".

Line 3 (Format 5F10.3)

Item Name Description

1 ALLOY Alloy identification

2 POWER Welding heat input

3 SPEED Welding travel speed

4 FOCUS Location of focus

5 EFF Absorptivity

-' - . q.:
 160
Line 4 (Format 5F10.3)

Item Name Description

1 YMAX Plate thickness

2 YO Effective depth of internal heat source

3 RO Effective radius of heat source

4 ZARC Location of energy source at start

5 ZEND Location of energy source at end

0

Line 5 (Format 5F10.5)

Item Name Description

1 DELT1 Initial time increment

2 DELT2 Time increment after melting

3 CONVCR Criteria for convergence test

4 TINIT Initial Temperature

5 TAMB Ambient Temperature

r
Line6 (Format 5F10.3)

Item Name Description e

1 TS Solidus temperature
2 TL Liquidus temperature "-.'- "

3 HLAT Latent Heat; 0 for enthalpy method

4 EMISS Emissivity for radiation loss

5 CMULTP Multiplier for ther. cond. in liquid . 5

" S
,2'-

eA
 161

Line 7 (Format 3110)

Item Name Description

N(1) # of temp. where ther. cond. is declared

2 N(2) # of temp. where sp. heat is declared

3 N(3) # of temp. where enthalpy is declared

Line 8 Onwards

Next few lines declare the thermal conductivity, volumetric specific heat and

the enthalpy at N(1), N(2) and N(3) temperatures respectively. Also, line 7
through end are repeated NMATL times for each material in the domain.

MESH

An example of the MESH file used for the finite element mesh shown in figure S

5.33 is listed at the end of this section. The first set of lines (Format 1515) ON
describe the nodal connectivity array for each of the elements. Item 1 is the -
element number. Wherever similar patterns of elements exist, node numbers and

other characteristics of the element are generated. For instance, based on the
values in lines 5 and 6 for elements 5 and 37 respectively, the node numbers etc.

for elements 5, 9, 13, 17, ..... and 37 are generated - item 2 defines the increment

in element numbers NDIFF. :-

Item 3 in these lines defines NE for each element which identifies any edge in

the quadrilateral element which lies on the surface. This is required for calculating
the convective and radiation losses from the element surface.

S
 162

NE Description
I Edge connecting nodes 1 and 2S
2 Edge connecting nodes 2 and 3

3 Edge connecting nodes 3 and 4

4 Edge connecting nodes 4 and 1

Item 4 defines IMATL which identifies the element to a material number in

order to use the associated material properties. Item 5 gives the number of nodes
(4 to 8) being used in the particular element, and item 6 to last give the associated

elemental node numbers.

In the second set of lines, the nodal coordinates (x and y) are listed (Format

215, 2F10.5). Again, the coordinates may be generated if a repeating pattern

occurs in the mesh using NDIFF - the node numbers increment in the pattern.
1 0 2 1 4 19 1 2 20
2 0 2 1 4 38 19 20 39 "V'
3 0 2 1 4 58 38 39 59
4 0 2 1 4 78 58 59 79 %
5 0 0 1 4 20 2 3 21
37 4 0 1 4 28 10 11 29
6 0 0 1 4 39 20 21 40
34 4 0 1 4 46 27 23 47
7 0 0 1 4 59 39 40 60
31 4 0 1 4 65 45 46 66
8 0 0 1 4 79 59 60 80
28 4 0 1 4 84 64 65 85
32 0 0 1 4 85 65 66 67 0
35 0 0 1 4 66 46 47 48
36 0 0 1 4 67 66 48 68
38 0 0 1 4 47 28 29 30
39 0 0 1 4 48 47 30 49
40 0 0 1 4 68 48 49 50
41 0 0 1 5 30 11 12 31 29
42 0 0 1 5 50 30 31 51 49
43 0 0 1 4 31 12 13 32
53 2 0 1 4 36 17 18 37
44 0 0 1 4 51 31 32 52
54 2 0 1 4 56 36 37 57 %
55 0 1 1 5 78 80 87 86 79
56 0 0 1 5 80 82 88 87 81
57 0 0 1 4 88 82 83 89 0
59 1 0 1 4 90 84 85 91
60 0 0 1 4 91 85 67 92

',% %
bOUNWAMI U M~J M j7777.p-7'.77777 -7
77 -if.~1.VKJ v v -. ,Te -

163

70
71
0 :
30 - 4
4
9
,7
-5-7
-J
94
9j
.
_

2 70
9
763 0 C 4 9 '

85- 0 0 1 5 9. S7 e q9 9

70 0 0 2. 4 99 92 69 %00
77 0 0 1 4 2.00 69 70 101
85 0 1 1 5 93 95- 110 109 94
86 0 0 1 5 95 7 11 110 96
87 0 0 1 5 97 99 112 112 98
89 0 0 ! 5 99 112 112 10000
89 0 0 1 5 10 13 113 102
90 0 0 4 214 103 1-04 1-1-5
94 1 4 11 107 0 119
95 0 2 1 4 120 109 110 121
96 0 0 . 4 1 1 -

10 . 1 0 4 . 119 119 170

105 0 _ 5 120 122 132131121
106 0 1 5 122 124 133 132 123
107 0 0 ! 5 124 126 134 133 125
-08 0 0 - 5 5 12 125g 134 127
109 0 0 5 129 130 126 135 129
110 0 2 - 1137 121 132 138
125 5 2 4 155
1 149 1 156
11_ 0 0 1 4 138 132 133 129
116 0 0 1 4 144 133 139 142
114 0 1 4 141 135 139 145
Li9 L 0 1. 4 147 141 142 148
0 0 1 4 150 144 145 15
121
124 0 i 4 153 147 149 154
126 0 0 1 5 150 152 zq7 156 151
127 0 0 1 5 D
54 158 157 153
123 0 2 1 4159 !55 156 160
134 3 2 1 4 167 163 164 168
129 0 0 1 4 160 156 157 161
125 3 0 1 4168 164 165 169
130a 0 c 1 4 161, 15 7 153 162
136 3 0 1 4169 165 16,6 170
1 0 0.00000 1.27000
5 1 0.00000 1.1.430041
6 0 0.00000 1.07950

1 0.00000 0.6950
13 1 0.00000 0.00000
i9 0 0.02000 ,.27000
23 1 .02000 1.14300
0 0.02000 1.07953
29 1 0.02000 0.76200
30 0 04000 0.76200
1_ 0.04000 0.63500
33 0 0.04000 0.50800
37 0.04000 0.00000
39 0 0.04000 1.27000
42 i 0.04000 1.14300
43 0 0.04000 1.079503 .
47 - 0.04000 0.825 'o
48 0 0.06000 0.8:5-0z
49 0 0.0600 0.76200
50 0 0.08000 0.76200
em

rv ~ ~ r~ ~ 4~ 'q.
 164

2 0.08000 06 3 500a
--

0 0.08000 . 3060C
'....,.)-.
570.08000 0.0000
53 0 0.06000 Z.7000
62 0.0000 . 00
3 0 0.06000 .50
66 2 0.06000 0.88900
67 0 0.08000 0.8900
63 0 0.08000 0.8250
69 0 0 .2000 0.82550
72 2 0.2000 0.63500
73 0 0.82.000 0 .800
77 2 0.2.2000 0 . 00000
78 0 0.08000 1.27000
82 1 0.08000 1.24300
83 0 0.08000 1.07950
85 . O0.08000 0.95250
86 0 0.2000 1.27000
92 2 0.22000 0.8800"
93 0 0.6000 1.27000
503 1 0.16000 0.63500
2.04 0 0.126000 0.50800
.08 1. 0.126000 0.00000
209 0 0.28000 1.27000
"1 0.8 000 O.00000
2.0 0 0.40000 1.27000
10 1 0.40000 0.00000
132. 0 0.60000 1.27000
136 1 0.60000 0.00000
137 0 0.30000 1.27000
142 0.80000 0.00000
143 0 1.00000 1.27000
148 1 1.0000 0.00000
.49 0 2.00000 1.27000
254 1 2.00000 0.00000
2.5 0 4.00000 1.27000
167 4 1.000000 .27000
.56 0 4.00000 1.01600
53 4 2.00000C 701600
!57 0 4.0000C 0.50800 , "
-69 4 !0.00000 0.50800 ."" . "
153 0 4.00000 0.00000
170 4 10.00000 0.00000

,,OUTP UT 0 U,,
,.,
,, _.

The OUTPUT data S'e p-ints the nodai tempera:tures a a frequecy of

nS
'
NP = ,-2T :e-te'e. From the temnera-ure hiz cries, c7oiin; ates. ci'd.ca on "

, es. - d he z- - - -a-d en: aze ea.s: " . . at,..

aae .
.S/.

,0,',